Table 3.

Study adherence to Mixed Method Appraisal Tool criteria

Qualitative studies	Research question is clear	Data address research question	Qualitative methods are appropriate	Methods adequately answer research question	Findings are adequately derived from data	Interpretation is sufficiently substantiated by data	Coherence between data sources, methods, analysis, and interpretation
Alessi et al. (2017)	•	•	•	•	•	•	•
Bianchi et al. (2014)	•	•	•	•	•	•	•
Cerezo et al. (2014)	•	•	•	•	•	•	•
Cheney et al. (2017)	○	○	○	○	•	•	•
Gowin et al. (2017)	•	○	•	○	•	•	○
Hwahng et al. (2019)	•	•	•	•	•	○	•
Palazzolo et al. (2016)	•	•	•	•	•	•	•
Rhodes et al. (2015)	•	•	•	•	•	•	•
Sausa et al. (2007)	•	•	•	•	•	•	•

Quantitative studies			Relevant sampling strategy	Sample represents target population	Appropriate measurement	Low risk of nonresponse bias	Appropriate statistical analysis
Crepet et al. (2016)	•	○	○	○	○	○	○
Leyva-Flores et al. (2016)	•	•	•	○	•	○	•
Nemoto et al. (2011)	•	•	•	•	•	•	•
Nuttbrock and Hwahng (2017)	•	•	○	○	○	○	•
Rhodes et al. (2013)	•	•	•	○	•	○	•
Spizzichino et al. (1998)	•	•	•	•	•	•	•
Spizzichino et al. (2001)	•	•	•	•	•	•	•
Yamanis et al. (2018)	•	•	•	•	○	○	•
Zaccarelli et al. (2004)	○	•	•	○	•	○	○
Zehender et al. (2004)	•	•	•	○	•	•	•

Mixed methods studies			Adequate rationale for mixed methods	Effective integration of study components	Results adequately brought together in interpretation	Divergences and inconsistencies adequately addressed	Each component meets quality criteria for method
Alessi et al. (2018)	•	•	•	•	•	•	•

• indicates that a study met the MMAT appraisal criteria in the checklist.

○ indicates that a study did not meet the MMAT appraisal criteria in the checklist.