Table 4.

Assessment of studies examining criterion validity using COSMIN grid

Authors	Criteria (C)							TOTAL	COSMIN Percentage (%)	Quality (COSMIN)	Total inter-rater agreement
	C1	C2	C3	C4	C5	C6	C7
Esliger et al. 2007 [52]	0	0	0	1	1	1	NA	3	50	LQ	83
Abel Mark et al. 2008 [24]	1	1	1	1	1	1	NA	6	100	HQ	100
Sorti et al. 2008 [10]	1	1	0	1	1	1	NA	5	83	HQ	83
Motl et al. 2011 [22]	1	0	1	1	1	1	NA	5	83	HQ	83
Webber et al. 2014 [1]	0	0	0	1	1	1	NA	3	50	LQ	83
Feito et al. 2015 [25]	1	1	0	1	1	1	NA	5	83	HQ	66
Lee et al. 2015 [27]	1	0	0	1	0	1	NA	3	50	LQ	83
Hickey et al. 2016 [54]	1	0	0	1	1	1	NA	4	67	MQ	83
Riel et al. 2016 [57]	1	1	1	1	1	1	NA	6	100	HQ	83
Webber et al. 2016 [16]	1	1	0	1	1	1	NA	5	83	HQ	100
Chow et al. 2017 [51]	0	1	1	1	1	1	NA	5	83	HQ	100
Feng et al. 2017 [53]	1	0	1	1	0	1	NA	4	67	MQ	83
Hochsmann et al. 2018 [26]	1	0	1	1	1	1	NA	5	83	HQ	83
Jones et al. 2018 [56]	1	0	1	1	1	1	NA	5	83	HQ	83
Imboden et al. 2018 [55]	1	0	0	1	0	1	NA	5	83	HQ	66
Hergenroeder et al. 2018 [50]	0	0	0	1	1	1	NA	3	50	LQ	100
Kendall et al. 2019 [11]	1	1	1	1	1	1	NA	6	100	HQ	83
Höchsmann et al. 2020 [58]	0	0	0	1	1	1	NA	3	50	LQ	66
Bezuidenhout et al. 2021 [61]	0	0	0	0	1	1	NA	2	33.33	LQ	83
Taoum et al. 2021 [60]	0	1	0	1	1	1	NA	4	67	LQ	100
Karaca et al. 2021 [59]	0	0	0	1	1	1	NA	3	50	LQ	100

NA not applicable, 1 for excellent, 0 for good or fair or poor, MQ moderate quality, LQ low quality, HQ high quality