Table 1.
Assessment of study quality using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies (EPHPP).
| Study | Selection Bias |
Study Design |
Con- Founders |
Blinding | Data Collection Methods |
Withdrawals and Dropouts |
Global Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chen et al. (2021) [37] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Dalibalta et al. (2017) [30] | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 |
| DiFrancisco-Donoghueet al. (2018) [31] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Gifari et al. (2021) [32] | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Ha and So (2012) [33] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Joseph et al. (2014) [41] | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Joseph et al. (2016) [42] | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Lee et al. (2021) [43] | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 3 |
| Mathunjwa et al. (2013) [44] | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Moravveji et al. (2019) [38] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Pacholek et al. (2021) [36] | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 |
| Roopchand-Martin et al. (2015) [45] |
3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Siqiang (2018) [34] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 |
| Sun et al. (2020) [39] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Zhang, W. and Yu, L. (2021) [35] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 |
| Winters-Stone et al. (2020) [40] | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Ratings: 1= strong, 2 = moderate, 3 = weak.