Component | Item | Quality criteria description | Banke-Thomas, 2016 | Magadi, 2007 | Brabin, 1998 | Magadi, 2002 | Reynolds, 2006 | Ebeigbe, 2007 | Magadi, 2007 | Elhassan, 2009 | Chaibva, l,2009 | Alemayhue, 2010 | Birungi, 2011 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Objectives | 1 | State specific objectives, including any pre-specified hypotheses | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Methods | |||||||||||||
 Study design | 2 | Present key elements of study design early in the paper | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
 Setting | 3 | Describe the setting, locations, and relevant dates, including periods of recruitment, exposure, follow-up, and data collection | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
 Participants | 4 | Give the eligibility criteria, and the sources and methods of selection of participants | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
 Variables | 5 | Clearly define all outcomes, exposures, predictors, potential confounders, and effect modifiers. | 2 | 2 | 2 |  | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 |  | 1 | 1 |
 Data sources/ measurement | 6 | For each variable of interest, give sources of data and details of methods of assessment (measurement). | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 |  | 2 |  | 2 | 1 | 1 |
 Bias | 7 | Describe any efforts to address potential sources of bias | 2 | 1 | 1 |  | 1 |  | 1 |  | 1 | 1 | 1 |
 Study size | 8 | Explain how the study size was arrived at | 1 |  | 1 | 2 | 2 |  |  | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
 Quantitative variables | 9 | Explain how quantitative variables were handled in the analyses. If applicable, describe which groupings were chosen and why | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
 Statistical methods | 10 | Describe all statistical methods, including those used to control for confounding | 2 | 2 | 2 |  | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
 | 11 | Explain how missing data were addressed | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |  |  | 1 |
Results | |||||||||||||
 Participants | 12 | Report numbers of participants and study and response rate | 2 | 1 | 1 |  | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
 Descriptive data | 13 | Give characteristics of study participants (eg demographic, clinical, social) and information on exposures and potential confounders | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 |
 Main results | 14 | Give unadjusted estimates and, if applicable, confounder-adjusted estimates and their precision (eg, 95% confidence interval). Make clear which confounders were adjusted for and why they were included | 2 | 2 | 1 |  | 2 | 1 | 2 |  | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Discussion | |||||||||||||
 Key Results | 15 | Summarise key results with reference to study objectives | 2 | 2 | 2 |  | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
 Limitations | 16 | Discuss limitations of the study, taking into account sources of potential bias or imprecision. Discuss both direction and magnitude of any potential bias | 2 | 1 | 1 |  | 2 | 1 | 1 |  | 2 | 1 | 2 |
 Interpretation | 17 | Give a cautious overall interpretation of results considering objectives, limitations, multiplicity of analyses, results from similar studies, and other relevant evidence | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 |
 |  | Quality score | 32 | 26 | 24 | 16 | 31 | 17 | 27 | 17 | 23 | 23 | 24 |
 |  | % Quality score | 94 | 77 | 70 | 47 | 91 | 50 | 79 | 50 | 67 | 67 | 70 |
Component | item | Quality criteria description | Ochako, 2011 | Gross, 2012 | Rai, 2012 | Rai l, 2013 | Singh, 2006 | Rai, 2014 | Worku, 2016 | Banke-Thomas.2017 | Helleringer, 2017 | Musarandega, 2017 | Ronen, 2017 |
Objectives | 1 | State specific objectives, including any pre-specified hypotheses | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
Methods | |||||||||||||
 Study design | 2 | Present key elements of study design early in the paper | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
 Setting | 3 | Describe the setting, locations, and relevant dates, including periods of recruitment, exposure, follow-up, and data collection | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
 Participants | 4 | Give the eligibility criteria, and the sources and methods of selection of participants | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
 Variables | 5 | Clearly define all outcomes, exposures, predictors, potential confounders, and effect modifiers. | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
 Data sources/ measurement | 6 | For each variable of interest, give sources of data and details of methods of assessment (measurement). | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
 Bias | 7 | Describe any efforts to address potential sources of bias | 1 |  | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 |  | 1 |
 Study size | 8 | Explain how the study size was arrived at | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
 Quantitative variables | 9 | Explain how quantitative variables were handled in the analyses. If applicable, describe which groupings were chosen and why | 1 |  | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
 Statistical methods | 10 | Describe all statistical methods, including those used to control for confounding | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
 | 11 | Explain how missing data were addressed | 1 |  | 1 |  | 1 |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Results | |||||||||||||
 Participants | 12 | Report numbers of participants and study and response rate | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
 Descriptive data | 13 | Give characteristics of study participants (eg demographic, clinical, social) and information on exposures and potential confounders | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
 Main results | 14 | Give unadjusted estimates and, if applicable, confounder-adjusted estimates and their precision (eg, 95% confidence interval). Make clear which confounders were adjusted for and why they were included | 1 |  | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Discussion | |||||||||||||
 Key results | 15 | Summarise key results with reference to study objectives | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
 Limitations | 16 | Discuss limitations of the study, taking into account sources of potential bias or imprecision. Discuss both direction and magnitude of any potential bias | 1 | 1 |  | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
 Interpretation | 17 | Give a cautious overall interpretation of results considering objectives, limitations, multiplicity of analyses, results from similar studies, and other relevant evidence | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
 |  | Quality score | 25 | 19 | 26 | 24 | 24 | 24 | 27 | 29 | 21 | 23 | 19 |
 |  | % Quality score | 73 | 55 | 76 | 70 | 70 | 70 | 79 | 85 | 61 | 67 | 55 |