TABLE 5

Systematic Review: Methodological Quality of Studies (n = 11)

StudyDefined SampleRepresentative SampleOutcome Rater BlindingMethod of AssessmentOutcome Data ReportedAdequate Power CalculationStatistical Adjustment for ConfoundersScore/out of 8
(1) Face Validity(2) Evidence of Psychometrics
Adnams et al 200128YesYesYesYesNoYesNoYes6/8
Aronson et al 198529YesYesNoYesNoYesNoYes5/8
Autti-Rämö and Granström 199130YesYesNoYesNoYesNoNo4/8
Barr et al 199027NoYesYesYesNoYesNoYes5/8
Bay et al 201212YesYesYesYesYesYesNAYes8/8
Coles et al 198731YesYesNoYesNoYesNoNo4/8
Davies et al 201136YesYesNoYesYesYesNoNo5/8
Jirikowic et al 201338NoYesYesYesYesYesYesYes7/8
Kesmodel et al 201339YesYesYesYesYesYesNAYes8/8
Kooistra et al 200932YesYesYesYesYesYesNoYes7/8
Kyllerman et al 198533YesYesNoYesNoYesNoYes5/8
Roebuck et al 199834YesYesNoYesNoYesYesYes6/8
Simmons et al 201037YesYesNoYesYesYesNoNo5/8
Smith et al 198635YesYesYesYesNoYesNoYes6/8
  • A quality score was allocated to each individual study as an arbitrary measure of quality. Yes denotes criterion clearly satisfied; No denotes criterion clearly not satisfied or unclear if criterion is satisfied. NA, not applicable because population based study and scored as 1.