樱花视频

Skip to main content

Table 2 Critical appraisal of eligible cohort studies

From: Risk factors for infection in older adults with home care: a mixed methods systematic review with meta-analysis

Citation

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Q7

Q8

Q9

Q10

Q11

Noguchi et al., 2020 [27]

Y

Y

U

Y

Y

Y

U

Y

U

Y

Y

Osakwe et al., 2019 [28]

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Shih et al., 2019 [29]

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

U

Y

Y

U

N

Y

Yokobayashi et al., 2013 [30]

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

U

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Yokobayashi et al., 2014 [32]

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

U

U

Y

Y

Y

Y

White et al., 1995 [52]

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

U

Y

Y

  1. Y yes, N no, U unclear
  2. JBI Critical appraisal checklist for cohort studies
  3. Q1: Were the two groups similar and recruited from the same population?
  4. Q2: Were the exposures measured similarly to assign people to both exposed and unexposed groups?
  5. Q3: Was the exposure measured in a valid and reliable way?
  6. Q4: Were confounding factors identified?
  7. Q5: Were strategies to deal with confounding factors stated?
  8. Q6: Were the groups/participants free of the outcome at the start of the study (or at the moment of exposure)?
  9. Q7: Were the outcomes measured in a valid and reliable way?
  10. Q8: Was the follow up time reported and sufficient to be long enough for outcomes to occur?
  11. Q9: Was follow up complete, and if not, were the reasons to loss to follow up described and explored?
  12. Q10: Were strategies to address incomplete follow up utilized?
  13. Q11: Was appropriate statistical analysis used?
Back to article page

樱花视频

ISSN: 1471-2458

Contact us