Table 2.

Study quality assessment using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) Version 2018.

Study	Screening questions		Qualitative (all)					Quantitative (non-randomized)					Quality score (%)
			1.1	1.2	1.3	1.4	1.5	3.1	3.2	3.3	3.4	3.5
Anderson et al. (2019)28	+	+						+	?	+	+	+	80
Caron et al. (2021)38	+	+	+	+	+	+	+						100
Guo et al. (2020)29	+	+						+	?	+	+	+	80
Hammer et al. (2020)32	+	+						+	?	+	+	+	80
Hutchison et al. (2017)33	+	+						+	+	+	+	+	100
McGuine et al. (2020)36	+	+						+	?	?	–	+	40
McGuckin et al. (2016)30	+	+	+	+	+	+	+						100
Meier et al. (2020)35	+	+						+	?	+	+	+	80
Reinking et al. (2022)41								+	+	+	+	+	100
Tjong et al. (2017)31	+	+	+	+	+	+	+						100
Turner et al. (2017)34	+	+						+	+	–	?	+	60
Valovich McLeod et al. (2017)39	+	+	+	+	+	+	+						100
Weber et al. (2019)37	+	+						+	?	+	?	+	60
Williams et al. (2020)40	+	+						+	?	?	–	+	40

Notes: The methodological quality criteria for quantitative randomized studies (2.1–2.5), quantitative descriptive studies (4.1–4.5), and mixed methods studies (5.1–5.5) are not displayed since none of the included studies met those study designs. Notation for criteria met: +: yes; –: no; ?: can't say; blank area, not applicable to study design.

Screening questions:

S1. Are there clear research questions?

S2. Do the collected data allow to address the research questions?

Methodological quality criteria for qualitative studies:

1.1 Is the qualitative approach appropriate to answer the research question?

1.2 Are the qualitative data collection methods adequate to address the research question?

1.3 Are the findings adequately derived from the data?

1.4 Is the interpretation of results sufficiently substantiated by data?

1.5 Is there coherence between qualitative data sources, collection, analysis, and interpretation?

Methodological quality criteria for quantitative non-randomized studies:

3.1 Are the participants representative of the target population?

3.2 Are measurements appropriate regarding both the outcome and intervention (or exposure)?

3.3 Are there complete outcome data?

3.4 Are the confounders accounted for in the design and analysis?

3.5 During the study period, is the intervention administered (or exposure occurred) as intended?