Table 3.
Quality checklist for cross sectional study (Newcastle Ottawa Scale [30])
| Domains | Hart et al. [27] |
|---|---|
| Selection | |
| 1. Representativeness of the sample | |
| a) Truly representative of the average in the target population | - |
| b) Somewhat representative of the average in the target population | * |
| c) Selected group of users | - |
| d) No description of the sampling strategy | - |
| 2. Sample size | |
| a) Justified and satisfactory | - |
| b) Not justified | * |
| 3. Non-respondents | - |
| a) Comparability between respondents and non-respondents characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory | - |
| b) The response rate is unsatisfactory, or the comparability between respondents and non-respondents is unsatisfactory | - |
| c) No description of the response rate or the characteristics of the responders and the non-responders | * |
| 4. Ascertainment of the exposure | - |
| a) Validated measurement tool | * |
| b) Non-validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described | - |
| c) No description of the measurement tool | - |
| Comparability | |
| 1. The subjects in different outcome groups are comparable, based on the study design or analysis. Confounding factors are controlled | - |
| a) The study controls for the most important factor (select one) | * |
| b) The study control for any additional factor | - |
| Outcome | |
| 1. Assessment of the outcome | - |
| a) Independent blind assessment | - |
| b) Record linkage | ** |
| c) Self-report | - |
| d) No description | - |
| 2. Statistical test | - |
| a) The statistical test used to analyze the data is clearly described and appropriate, and the measurement of the association is presented, including confidence intervals and the probability level | * |
| b) The statistical test is not appropriate, not described or incomplete | - |