Description
Section 1: Research Design and Methodology
1. Research Objective
– Is the research objective clearly stated? (Yes/No)
– Does the study address a specific, focused question or issue? (Yes/No)
2. Study Design
– Is the systematic review design appropriate for addressing the research objectives? (Yes/No) The systematic review design aligns with the objectives.
– Were PRISMA guidelines followed? (Yes/No) – The research includes a PRISMA flowchart
and adheres to PRISMA standards.
3. Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria
– Are the inclusion and exclusion criteria clearly defined and appropriate? (Yes/No)
– Are these criteria relevant to the research questions? (Yes/No)
Section 2: Search Strategy
4. Database Selection
– Were the databases used for the literature search appropriate and comprehensive? (Yes/No) Databases such as PubMed, Scopus, and others were used.
– Were additional sources like grey literature or manual searches utilized? (Yes/No) – Partially.
Grey literature is not explicitly mentioned.
5. Search Terms
– Were the search terms clearly stated and relevant? (Yes/No)
– Were both Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and free-text terms used? (Yes/No)
6. Time Frame
– Is the time frame for the included studies appropriate? (Yes/No) – The review included
studies published between 2010 and 2024, which is a reasonable period.
Section 3: Data Extraction and Quality Assessment
7. Data Extraction Process
– Was the data extraction process clearly outlined and reproducible? (Yes/No)
– Was the data extracted relevant to the research question? (Yes/No)
8. Quality Appraisal
– Were appropriate tools (e.g., CASP, ROBIS) used to assess the quality of included studies?
(Yes/No) – CASP was applied for quality assessment.
– Was the quality assessment carried out independently by two or more reviewers? (Yes/No) mention of multiple reviewers, so unclear.
Section 4: Analysis and Results
9. Data Synthesis
– Was the synthesis of findings appropriate and clearly explained? (Yes/No)
– Were both quantitative and qualitative findings integrated effectively? (Yes/No)
10. Presentation of Results
– Are the results clearly presented, including tables, charts, or figures? (Yes/No) – using tables
and PRISMA charts.
– Are the main themes or findings adequately highlighted? (Yes/No)
Section 5: Discussion and Interpretation
11. Discussion
– Does the discussion adequately interpret the findings in the context of existing literature?
(Yes/No)
– Are the limitations of the systematic review discussed? (Yes/No)
12. Conclusion
– Does the conclusion align with the evidence presented in the results? (Yes/No)
– Are recommendations provided based on the findings? (Yes/No)
Section 6: Relevance and Applicability
13. Relevance
– Are the findings relevant to the target population or context? (Yes/No)
– Does the study address gaps in the existing literature? (Yes/No)
14. Applicability
– Can the findings be applied to inform practice or policy? (Yes/No)
Section 7: Ethical Considerations
15. Ethics
– Were ethical issues considered in the included studies? (Yes/No) – but only indirectly as it
synthesizes existing studies.
– Were there any conflicts of interest declared? (Yes/No) – Not explicitly stated.
Summary Scoring
– Total Number of “Yes” Responses: ___20__
– Total Number of “No” Responses: __2___
Overall Assessment
– Is the systematic review credible and reliable? (Yes/No)
– Can the findings be used to guide practice or further research? (Yes/No)
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
