Table 3.
Risk of bias evaluation results for cross-sectional studies included (score)
| Study | ① | ② | ③ | ④ | ⑤ | ⑥ | ⑦ | ⑧ | ⑨ | ⑩ | ⑪ | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ullah et al. 2015 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 7 |
| King et al. 2019 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 8 |
| Lewek et al. 2019 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 8 |
| Kumar et al. 2019 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 9 |
| King et al. 2020 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 8 |
| Habib et al. 2020 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 8 |
| Nazir et al. 2020 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 9 |
| Gallus et al. 2020 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 8 |
| Chaffee et al. 2021 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 11 |
| Alhajj et al. 2022 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 9 |
| Tantawi et al. 2022 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 9 |
| Kabbash et al. 2022 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 9 |
Define the source of information (survey, record review);
List inclusion and exclusion criteria for exposed and unexposed subjects (cases and controls) or refer to previous publications;
Indicate time period used for identifying patients;
Indicate whether or not subjects were consecutive if not population-based;
Indicate if evaluators of subjective components of study were masked to other aspects of the status of the participants;
Describe any assessments undertaken for quality assurance purposes (e.g. test/retest of primary outcome measurements);
Explain any patient exclusions from analysis;
Describe how confounding was assessed and explain any patient exclusions from analysis;
If applicable, explain how missing data were handled in the analysis;
Summarize patient response rates and completeness of data collection;
Clarify what follow-up, if any, was expected and the percentage of patients for which incomplete data or follow-up was obtained.