Table 2:
Quality assessment criteria – Joanna Briggs institute critical appraisal tool for prevalence studies.
| Author | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Q5 | Q6 | Q7 | Q8 | Q9 | Score | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pandey et al. | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 5 | Moderate risk of bias |
| Bhowmick et al. | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | Moderate risk of bias |
| Gopal et al. | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 5 | Moderate risk of bias |
| Joseph et al. | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 7 | Low risk of bias |
| Verma et al. | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 7 | Low risk of bias |
| Kaurani et al. | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | Moderate risk of bias |
| Chaudhary et al. | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 7 | Low risk of bias |
| Kaur et al. | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 7 | Low risk of bias |
| Singh et al. | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | High risk of bias |
| Srivastava et al. | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 5 | Moderate risk of bias |
| Wakode et al. | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | Moderate risk of bias |
| Nathiya et al. | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 7 | Low risk of bias |
| Hazarika et al. | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 7 | Low risk of bias |
| Gaur et al. | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 6 | Moderate risk of bias |
| Chauhan et al. | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | High risk of bias |
| Balhara et al. | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4 | Moderate risk of bias |
| Sebastian et al. | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 6 | Moderate risk of bias |
| Grover et al. | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 6 | Moderate risk of bias |
| Tomar et al. | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 6 | Moderate risk of bias |
| Wani et al. | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | High risk of bias |
| Reddy et al. | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 7 | Low risk of bias |
| Desai et al. | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 7 | Low risk of bias |
Q1 -Was the sample frame appropriate to address the target population?; Q2 -Was study participants sampled in an appropriate way?; Q3 -Was the sample size adequate?; Q4 -Was the study subjects and the setting described in detail?; Q5 -Was the data analysis conducted with sufficient coverage of the identified sample?; Q6 -Was valid methods used for the identification of the condition?; Q7 -Was the condition measured in a standard, reliable way for all participants?; Q8 -Was there appropriate statistical analysis?; Q9 -Was the response rate adequate, and if not, was the low response rate managed appropriately? (1 – Yes; 0 – No)