Skip to main content
. 2021 Mar 8;48(12):e255–e262. doi: 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000001407

TABLE 2.

Quality Assessment of Observational Studies Using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Criteria

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Total
Rashwan et al.21 Y N Y Y N Y Y Y N Y N 7
Ortashi et al.22 Y N Y Y N Y Y N N Y N 6
Lee et al.23 Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y N 8
Remschmidt et al.24 Y N Y Y N Y Y Y N Y N 7
Turiho et al.25 Y Y Y N N Y Y Y N Y N 7
Swarnapriya et al.26 Y N Y Y N Y Y Y N Y N 7
Mammas et al.27 Y Y Y Y N Y Y N N Y N 7
Fernandes et al.31s Y N Y Y N Y Y Y Y Y N 8
Wanderley et al.28 Y N Y Y N Y Y N N Y N 6
Widjaja29 Y N N Y N Y Y N N Y N 5
Schmidt-Grimminger et al.33s Y N N N N Y Y N N Y N 4
Zhuang et al.30 Y N N Y N Y Y N N N N 4
Katz et al.32s Y N N Y N Y Y N N N N 4

Criteria: yes (Y), 1; no (N), 0; unclear (U), 0.

1 = Define the source of information (survey, record review); 2 = list inclusion and exclusion criteria for exposed and unexposed subjects (cases and controls) or refer to previous publications; 3 = indicate time period used for identifying patients; 4 = indicate whether or not subjects were consecutive if not population-based; 5 = indicate if evaluators of subjective components of study were masked to other aspects of the status of the participants; 6 = describe any assessments undertaken for quality assurance purposes (e.g., test/retest of primary outcome measurements); 7 = explain any patient exclusions from analysis; 8 = describe how confounding was assessed and/or controlled; 9 = if applicable, explain how missing data were handled in the analysis; 10 = summarize patient response rates and completeness of data collection; 11 = clarify what follow-up, if any, was expected and the percentage of patients for which incomplete data or follow-up was obtained.