Table 1: Quality assessment for various study designs using the Sirriyeh, et al. tool [13].
|
Authors/year |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
Total Score |
|
Perng 2013 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
34 |
|
Cunningham 2015 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
3 |
32 |
|
Moshi 2019 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
39 |
|
Weng 2020 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
3 |
22 |
|
McCree 2015 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
26 |
|
Lyimo 2012 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
30 |
|
Henke 2021 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
34 |
|
Julius 2022 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
35 |
|
Kileo 2015 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
31 |
|
Kimambo 2023 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
28 |
|
Koneru 2017 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
34 |
|
Bateman 2019 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
35 |
|
Mrema 2022 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
32 |
|
Theophil 2022 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
35 |
|
Mboineki 2020 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
32 |
|
Mugassa 2020 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
37 |
|
Lidofsky 2019 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
32 |
Criteria (scoring items as 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); 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.