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