Skip to main content

Table 3 Results of quality of studies on the psychometric properties of instruments for sensory and motor assessment after nerve repair based on “Critical Appraisal of Study Quality for Psychometric Articles: Evaluation Form” [46]

From: Functional, motor, and sensory assessment instruments upon nerve repair in adult hands: systematic review of psychometric properties

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

  1. Item evaluation criteria of critical appraisal tool. NA not applicable
Back to article page

Systematic Reviews

ISSN: 2046-4053