|
Study
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
Total
|
Percent
|
|---|
|
Jerosch-Herold [47]
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
NA
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
11
|
45.8
|
|
Brandsma et al. [60]
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
1
|
15
|
62.5
|
|
Rosén [61]
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
NA
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
15
|
62.5
|
|
Rosén and Lundborg [55]
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
21
|
87.5
|
|
Rosén and Jerosh-Herold [59]
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
18
|
75
|
|
Rosén and Lundborg [24]
|
2
|
1
|
0
|
1
|
0
|
NA
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
12
|
50
|
|
Jerosch-Herold [57]
|
1
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
15
|
62.5
|
|
Rosén [56]
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
0
|
0
|
NA
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
15
|
62.5
|
|
Schreuders et al. [48]
|
2
|
1
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
NA
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
13
|
54.2
|
|
Jerosch-Herold et al. [54]
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
0
|
NA
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
17
|
70.8
|
|
Carlsson et al. [49]
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
17
|
70.8
|
|
Dias et al. [50]
|
1
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
15
|
62.5
|
|
Naidu et al. [52]
|
1
|
2
|
0
|
2
|
0
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
16
|
66.7
|
|
Packham and MacDermid [53]
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
NA
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
21
|
95.4
|
|
Chen et al. [51]
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
22
|
91.6
|
|
Hsu et al. [58]
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
0
|
1
|
14
|
58.3
|
- Item evaluation criteria of critical appraisal tool. NA not applicable
