Table 3.

Quality scores of the studies included in the systematic review.

	(A)			(B)								(C)	(D)				Score
	(a)	(b)	(c)	(d)	(e)	(f)	(g)	(h)	(i)	(j)	(k)	(l)	(m)	(n)	(o)	(p)
Messing et al. (2015a)	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	1	0	2	2	2	2	1	28
Messing et al. (2020b)	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	1	2	1	2	2	2	2	1	1	28
Richards et al. (2019)	2	2	2	2	2	2	0	0	2	1	0	2	2	0	2	2	23
Sabri et al. (2019)	2	2	2	2	2	2	0	0	2	2	0	1	2	0	2	2	23
Glass et al. (2009)	2	2	2	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	1	2	17
Glass et al. (2008)	2	2	1	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	1	1	15
McFarlane et al. (1998)	2	2	2	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	1	2	17
Dutton et al. (2018)	2	2	1	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	2	1	16
Grant and Cross-Denny (2017)	2	2	1	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	2	1	16
Messing et al. (2016)	2	2	2	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	1	0	2	0	0	2	17
Johnson et al. (2020)	2	2	2	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	1	0	2	0	1	2	18
Dutton et al. (2019)	2	2	2	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	2	0	1	0	0	2	17
Ward-Lasher et al. (2018)	2	2	2	2	2	2	0	0	2	2	0	2	2	0	1	2	23
Brignone and Gomez (2017)	2	2	2	2	1	2	0	0	0	0	2	0	0	0	0	2	15
Messing and Campbell (2016)	2	2	2	2	1	2	2	1	2	1	1	1	2	2	1	1	25
Messing et al. (2015b)	2	2	2	2	2	2	0	0	2	1	2	2	2	0	1	2	24
Messing et al. (2014)	2	2	2	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	2	0	2	0	1	2	19
Messing et al. (2013)	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	1	31
Messing et al. (2020a)	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	1	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	1	30
Bianchi et al. (2014)	2	2	2	2	2	2	0	0	2	2	0	0	2	0	0	2	20
Campbell (1986)	2	2	1	2	2	2	2	1	0	0	0	0	1	0	2	1	18
Anderson et al. (2021)	2	2	1	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	2	0	2	0	2	2	19
Storey and Hart (2014)	2	2	1	2	2	2	2	2	1	2	1	0	2	2	2	1	26
López-Ossorio et al. (2021)	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	1	0	0	0	0	2	2	2	2	23
Nesset et al. (2017)	2	2	2	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	2	2	18
Cunha and Goalves (2016)	2	2	2	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	2	0	1	2	17
Messing et al. (2017)	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	1	2	2	1	2	2	2	1	1	28
Wang (2015)	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	1	0	0	0	0	2	0	2	1	20
Glass et al. (2010)	2	2	1	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	0	1	1	14
Campbell et al. (2009)	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	1	0	0	0	0	2	2	1	2	20
Williams et al. (2021)	2	2	2	2	2	2	0	0	1	1	0	0	2	0	1	2	19
Snider et al. (2009)	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	0	2	2	0	2	2	2	2	1	27
Echeburúa et al. (2009)	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	1	0	0	0	0	2	2	2	2	23

(A) Selection bias; (B) Measurement bias; (C) Attrition bias; (D) Reporting bias.

(a) Clear objectives.

(b) Participants were recruited in an acceptable way.

(c) Representative sample.

(d) Clear definition of outcome.

(e) Clear description of the methods.

(f) The outcome was measured in the same way across all participants.

(g) The tool was administered by professionals.

(h) Authors use multiple sources of information to score risk assessments.

(i) The follow-up period was sufficiently described and reported.

(j) The follow-up period was long enough.

(k) Missing data treatment.

(l) Drop-out rates were recorded; (m) Appropiate statistical tests.

(n) The predictive validity of the tests was reported.

(o) Potential confounders were taken into account.

(p) Generilizable results.