Skip to main content

Table 3 Percentage of studies scoring ‘Yes’ for quality assessment criteria (Kmet et al. [31]; Collins et al. [32])

From: The rise of rapid implementation: a worked example of solving an existing problem with a new method by combining concept analysis with a systematic integrative review

Criteria

n

%

Qualitative Criteria

1

Question/objective sufficiently described?

21

100

2

Study design evident and appropriate?

21

100

3

Context for the study clear?

20

95

4

Connection to a theoretical framework / wider body of knowledge?

21

100

5

Sampling strategy described, relevant and justified?

4

19

6

Data collection methods clearly described and systematic?

4

19

7

Data analysis clearly described and systematic?

4

19

8

Use of verification procedure(s) to establish credibility?

3

14

9

Conclusions supported by the results?

19

90

10

Reflexivity of the account?

6

29

Quantitative Criteria

1

Question / objective sufficiently described?

4

100

2

Study design evident and appropriate?

4

100

3

Method of subject/comparison group selection or source of information/input variables described and appropriate?

4

100

4

Subject (and comparison group, if applicable) characteristics sufficiently described?

N/A

N/A

5

If interventional and random allocation was possible, was it described?

N/A

N/A

6

If interventional and blinding of investigators was possible, was it reported?

N/A

N/A

7

If interventional and blinding of subjects was possible, was it reported?

N/A

N/A

8

Outcome and (if applicable) exposure measure(s) well defined and robust to measurement / misclassification bias?

Means of assessment reported?

3

100

9

Sample size appropriate?

4

100

10

Analytic methods described/justified and appropriate?

4

100

11

Some estimate of variance is reported for the main results?

4

100

12

Controlled for confounding?

4

100

13

Results reported in sufficient detail?

4

100

14

Conclusions supported by the results?

4

100

  1. Note. Not all criteria were applicable for all studies; QAT = Quality Assessment Tool