Skip to main content

Table 3 Critical appraisal results for included studies using the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklista

From: The experiences and barriers in addressing type 2 diabetes mellitus-associated erectile dysfunction: a mixed method systematic review

Authors (year)

Study design

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Q7

Q8

Q9

Q10

Total

Almigbal and Schattner (2018) [35]

Cross-sectional

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

N/A

6/8

Jiann, et al. (2009) [30]

Cross-sectional

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N/A

N/A

6/8

Lo, et al. (2014) [31]

Cross-sectional

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

N/A

N/A

8/8

Cooper, et al. (2018) [36]

Qualitative

U

Y

U

U

U

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

5/10

Hadisuyatmana, et al. (2021) [8]

Qualitative

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

Y

8/10

Rutte, et al. (2016) [33]

Quantitative component of Mixed-method study

N

N

U

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

N/A

5/9

Rutte, et al. (2016) [33]

Qualitative component of Mixed-method study

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

9/10

  1. legend: Q# question number, Y yes, N no, U unclear, N/A not applicable
  2. aAll included articles were appraised using the appropriate critical appraisal checklist sourced from the Joanna Briggs Institute. Qualitative studies were appraised using a critical appraisal checklist for qualitative research, cross-sectional studies were assessed using the appraisal checklist for analytical cross-sectional studies, and the Mixed method study components were separately appraised using quantitative and qualitative appraisal checklists [27, 28]