Table 2.
Quality assessment of included studies using the Sirriyeh et al. (2012) tool for diverse study designs
| Author/year | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | Total Score |
| Ndikom and Ofi (2012) | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 2 | N/A | N/A | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 18 |
| Titiloye et al. (2017) | 0 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | N/A | 1 | 1 | N/A | 0 | 0 | 16 |
| Abiodun et al. (2013) | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | N/A | 0 | 0 | N/A | 2 | 0 | 20 |
| Isa Modibbo et al. (2016) | 0 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 3 | N/A | N/A | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 30 |
| Amu et al (2017) | 0 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 0 | N/A | 1 | 2 | N/A | 2 | 0 | 24 |
| Chigbu and Aniebue (2011) | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | N/A | 3 | 2 | N/A | 2 | 0 | 21 |
| Nwankwo et al. (2011) | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | N/A | 0 | 2 | N/A | 3 | 2 | 27 |
| Ogwunga et al. (2020) | 0 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 18 |
| Ezem (2007) | 0 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | N/A | 0 | 0 | N/A | 2 | 0 | 16 |
| Amos and Awolude (2019) | 0 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 0 | N/A | 0 | 2 | N/A | 2 | 0 | 21 |
| Bammeke and Ndikom (2014) | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | N/A | 0 | 2 | N/A | 0 | 0 | 21 |
| Hyacinth et al. (2012) | 0 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | N/A | 1 | 2 | N/A | 0 | 3 | 18 |
| Leo et al. (2020) | 0 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | N/A | 1 | 2 | N/A | 0 | 2 | 22 |
| Okunowo and Smith-Okonu (2020) | 0 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | N/A | 0 | 0 | N/A | 0 | 0 | 17 |
| Ndikom et al. (2020) | 0 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0 | N/A | 0 | 2 | N/A | 0 | 0 | 19 |
Criteria (scores 0 = not at all, 1 = very slightly, 2 = moderately, 3 = complete)
1 = explicit theoretical framework; 2 = statement of aims/objectives in main body of report; 3 = clear description of research setting; 4 = evidence of sample size considered in terms of analysis; 5 = representative sample of target group of a reasonable size; 6 = description of procedure for data collection; 7 = rationale for choice of data collection tool(s); 8 = detailed recruitment data; 9 = statistical assessment of reliability and validity of measurement tool(s) (quantitative only); 10 = fit between stated research question and method of data collection (quantitative only); 11 = fit between stated research question and format and content of data collection tool (e.g., interview schedule) (qualitative); 12 = fit between research question and method of analysis; 13 = good justification for analytical method selected; 14 = assessment of reliability of analytical process (qualitative only); 15 = evidence of user involvement in design; 16 = strengths and limitations critically discussed, N/A = Not applicable