Skip to main content

Table 2 Ferro and speechley quality index scores for included studies [30]

From: Chew and Spit (CHSP): a systematic review

 

Reporting

External validity

Internal validity (Bias and Confounding)

Power

 
 

Hypothesis or objectives described

Main outcomes described in introduction or Methods sections

Patient characteristics described

Main findings described

Estimates of the random variability

Probability values reported

Response rate described

Patients Asked to Participate Representative of Population

Patients Prepared to Participate Representative of Population

Staff, Places, and Facilities Representative of Treatment Majority

“Data Dredging” Made Clear

Statistical Tests Appropriate

Outcome Measures Valid and Reliable

Adjustment for Confounding

Sample Size or Power Calculation

Totals

Song et al. [34]

1

1

1

1

0

1

0

0

1

0

1

1

1

0

0

9

Guarda et al. [32]

1

1

1

1

0

1

0

0

1

0

1

1

1

0

0

9

De Zwaan [37]

1

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

McCutcheon & Nolan [39]

1

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2

Makhzoumi et al. [36]

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

0

0

1

1

1

0

0

10

Kovacs et al. [38]

1

1

1

0

0

1

0

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

0

9

Durkin et al. [35]

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

0

0

1

1

1

0

0

10

Mitchell et al. [1]

0

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

4

Smith and Ross [33]

1

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

2