Table 1 Ranking according to the critical appraisal tool
1 | Saukko (2009) [23] | 97% | > 80% (excellent) |
2 | Roomaney, author, & Naidoo (2014) [15] | 96% | |
3 | Ncube, Barlow, & Mayers (2016) [24] | 93% | |
Norhayati, Asrenee, Hazlina, & Sulaima (2017) [25] | 93% | ||
4 | Tinoco-Ojanguren, Glantz, Martinez-Hernandez, & Ovando-Meza (2008) [26] | 91% | |
5 | Greenhalgh et al. (2015) [27] | 84% | |
Kaye et al. (2014) [28] | 84% | ||
6 | Lalor, Devane, & Begley (2007) [29] | 82% | |
Price et al. (2007) [30] | 82% | ||
7 | Lalor & Begley (2006) [31] | 80% | |
8 | Lalor, Begley, & Galavan (2009) [32] | 76% | 61–79 (strong) |
9 | Khan, Bilkis, Blum, Koblinsky, & Sultana (2012) [33] | 73% | |
10 | Souza, Cecatti, Krupa, Osis, & Parpinelli (2009) [34] | 71% | |
11 | Alex & Whitty-Rogers (2017) [35] | 69% | |
12 | Curran, McCoyd, Munch, & Wilkenfeld (2017) [36] | 64% | |
13 | Malouf & Redshaw (2017) [37] | 62% | |
Yeakey, Chipeta, Taulo, & Tsui (2009) [38] | 62% |