Table E6.

Summary of risk of bias assessment in prevalence studies

Study	Was the study's target population a close representation of the national population in relation to relevant variables?	Was the sampling frame a true or close representation of the target population?	Was some form of random selection used to select the sample or was a census undertaken?	Was the likelihood of nonresponse bias minimal?	Were data collected directly from the subjects?	Was an acceptable case definition used in the study?	Was the study instrument that measured the parameter of interest shown to have reliability and validity?	Was the same mode of data collection used for all subjects?	Was the length of the shortest prevalence period for the parameter of interest appropriate?	Were the numerators and denominators for the parameter of interest appropriate?	Summary item on the overall risk of study bias
Mangner et al, 20188	No	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	High
Jawitz et al, 20209	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	Moderate
Nakazato et al, 202010	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	Moderate
Hirji et al, 202011	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	Moderate
Tang et al, 202012	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	Moderate
Fukuhara et al, 202113	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	Moderate
Brescia et al, 202114	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	Moderate
Fukuhara et al, 202115	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	Moderate
Malvindi et al, 202116	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	Moderate
Fukuhara et al, 202117	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	Moderate

Yes = low risk; no = high risk.