Skip to main content

Table 5 Quality assessment (using modified Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT)) [67, 96]

From: The role of pharmacy in the management of cardiometabolic risk, metabolic syndrome and related diseases in severe mental illness: a mixed-methods systematic literature review

Qualitative studies
  Clear question Data allows question to be addressed Relevant sources of data Data processing relevant Consideration of context Reflexivity Overall assessment of quality
Taylor [73] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ****
McMorris [74] ✓ ✓ ✓ X ✓ X ***
Quirk [75] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ X ***
Shanker [76] ✓ ✓ X X ✓ X *
Quantitative: randomised controlled trial
  Clear question Data allows question to be addressed Clear description of randomisation Clear description of allocation Outcome data: complete > 80% Low withdrawal (< 20%) Overall assessment of quality
Schneiderhan [84] ✓ ✓ ✓ X X X *
Quantitative: non-randomised (assessed using modified assessment criteria)
  Clear question Data allows question to be addressed Recruitment minimises bias Appropriate measurements Pre and post groups comparable Outcome data complete (> 80%) or response rate (> 60%) Overall assessment of quality
Runcie [100] ✓ ✓ ✓ X ✓ ✓ ***
Barnes [101] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ****
Schneiderhan [89] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ****
Lizer [102] ✓ ✓ X ✓ X X *
DelMonte [88] ✓ ✓ ✓ X ✓ ✓ ***
McCleeary-Monthei [103] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ X X **
Kjeldsen [92] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ****
Ramanuj [104] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ****
Sud [86] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ X ✓ ***
Koffarnus [97] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ****
Barnes [98] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ****
Fischler [99] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ****
Sasson [94] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ****
Pena [95] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ X X **
Quantitative non-randomised
  Clear question Data allows question to be addressed Recruitment minimises bias Appropriate measurements and absence of contamination Groups comparable Outcome data complete (> 80%) or response rate (> 60%) Overall assessment of quality
Taveira [81] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ f✓ ****
Cohen [82] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ****
Bozymski [83] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ X X **
Quantitative descriptive
  Clear question Data allows question to be addressed Sampling strategy relevant Sample representative Appropriate measurements Response rate (> 60%) Overall assessment of quality
MacHaffie [105] ✓ ✓ X X ✓ X *
Gable [90] ✓ ✓ ✓ X ✓ X **
Lucca [91] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ X ✓ ***
Porras-Segovia [93] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ****
Bozymski [87] ✓ ✓ X X X X ***
Sharma [71, 72] ✓ ✓ X ✓ ✓ ✓ ***
Raynsford [85] ✓ ✓ ✓ X ✓ X **
Quantitative descriptive
  Clear question Data allows question to be addressed Sampling strategy relevant Sample representative Appropriate measurements Response rate (> 60%) Overall assessment of quality
MacHaffie [105] ✓ ✓ X X ✓ X *
Gable [90] ✓ ✓ ✓ X ✓ X **
Lucca [91] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ X ✓ ***
Porras-Segovia [93] ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ****
Bozymski [87] ✓ ✓ X X X X ***
Sharma [71, 72] ✓ ✓ X ✓ ✓ ✓ ***
Raynsford [85] ✓ ✓ ✓ X ✓ X **
Mixed methods studies
  Clear question Data allows question to be addressed Mixed methods design relevant Integration relevant Limitations associated with integration Assessment of qualitative aspect Assessment of quantitative aspect Which aspect achieved lowest score Overall assessment of quality
Ohlsen [77] ✓ ✓ X X X * *** Qualitative *
Watkins [78] ✓ ✓ X X X * **** Qualitative *
Lee [79] ✓ ✓ ✓ ? X ** *** Qualitative **
Health found [80] ✓ ✓ ✓ X X ** *** N/A both equal **
Mixed methods studies
  Clear question Data allows question to be addressed Mixed methods design relevant Integration relevant Limitations associated with integration Assessment of qualitative aspect Assessment of quantitative aspect Which aspect achieved lowest score Overall assessment of quality
Ohlsen [77] ✓ ✓ X X X * *** Qualitative *
Watkins [78] ✓ ✓ X X X * **** Qualitative *
Lee [79] ✓ ✓ ✓ ? X ** *** Qualitative **
Health found [80] ✓ ✓ ✓ X X ** ** N/A both equal **
  1. ✓Yes or methodologically sound; X, no or not methodologically sound
  2. ?Cannot tell whether methodologically sound or not
  3. Quality Appraisal of Included Studies Score:  *(25%) **(50%) *** (75%) **** (100%)
Back to article page

Systematic Reviews

ISSN: 2046-4053

\