Table 4.
Study | Sample frameΔ | Sample method | Sample size | Subject & Setting | Sample coverage | Case definition† | Case reliability | Statistical analysis | Response rate§ |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Responses: (+) = adequate, (?) = moderate/unclear, (−) = inadequate | |||||||||
| |||||||||
Community | |||||||||
Jung, et al. 2009 | |||||||||
Syed, et al. 2020 | |||||||||
Ye, et al. 2021 (UK) | |||||||||
Ye, et al. 2022 (USA) | |||||||||
Inpatient/Emergency Department | |||||||||
Bell, et al. 2002 | |||||||||
Bielefeldt 2013 | |||||||||
Hirsch, et al. 2019 | |||||||||
Kichloo, et al. 2021 | |||||||||
Nusra, et al. 2013 | |||||||||
Wadhwa, et al. 2017 | |||||||||
Wang, et al. 2008 | |||||||||
Diabetes Mellitus | |||||||||
Aleppo, et al. 2017 | |||||||||
Choung, et al. 2012 |
As adapted from the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) found at https://jbi.global/critical-appraisal-tools, accessed December 15, 2022.
Column titles correspond to questions in the JBI “Checklist for Prevalence Studies”, in numerical order.
Studies that used medical record or survey diagnoses were deemed high likelihood of misclassification and measurement bias and thus given a lower appraisal. These studies were also given the same low score for the following question of “case reliability” as chart diagnoses without objective verification are expected to be inconsistently applied.