Table 4 Case study B: comparison of additional characteristics between the existing systematic reviews (Galvao et al. [14], Jefferson et al. [15], Fell et al. [13], and McMillan et al. [16]) and our own new review
| Â | Galvao et al. [14] | Jefferson et al. [15] | Fell et al. [13] | McMillan et al. [16] | Own new review |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Study designs | RCTs, cohort studies | All study designs | RCTs, cohort, cross-sectional, case–control studies | All study designs | All study designs |
Period covered | Until 09/2013 | Until 05/2013 | Until 05/2013 | Until 03/2014 | Until 03/2014 |
Seasonal | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Pandemic | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No |
Meta-analysis | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No |
No. of included studies | 8 | 21 | 27 | 46 | 20 |
Risk of bias tool(s) used for RCTs | Cochrane risk of bias tool | Cochrane risk of bias tool | NA | JBI-MASTARI | Cochrane risk of bias tool |
Risk of bias tool(s) used for observational studies | NR | NOS | NOS; DBC | JBI-MASTARI | CASP |
Results of risk of bias assessment | NR | 10× high risk of bias; 11× unclear risk of bias | NOS: median 8.5 (of 9) DBC: median 25 (of 31) | Moderate to high quality | 9× high risk of bias; 9× low risk of bias; 2× unclear risk of bias |