Systematic Reviews
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2020.
World J Clin Oncol. Apr 24, 2020; 11(4): 217-242
Published online Apr 24, 2020. doi: 10.5306/wjco.v11.i4.217
Table 7 Critical appraisal of observational cohort and cross-sectional studies using the National Institutes of health study quality checklists
Al Saeed et al[42], 2015Al-Eisa and Al-Sobayel[36], 2012Al-Habsi et al[32], 2015Al-Malki et al[38], 2003Al-Shammari et al[33], 2015Alabdulkarim et al[81], 2018Albawardi et al[27], 2017Alsaeed et al[43], 2017Bener et al[45], 2017Carter et al[34], 2004Khalid[37], 2007Rudat et al[44], 2012Sayegh et al[35], 2016
Was the research question or objective clearly stated?YYYNNNYYYYYNY
Was the study population clearly specified and defined?YNYNYYYYYYYYY
Was the participation rate of eligible persons at least 50%?CDYY (but N for accelerometer)YYYYYYYYNANA
Were all subjects selected or recruited from the same or similar populations? Were inclusion/exclusion criteria prespecified?NYYNYYYYYYYYY
Was a sample size justification, power description or variance and effect estimates provided?NNNNYNYYYYYNN
Was the exposure of interest measured prior to the outcome being measured?YNNNNYNYNNNNY
Was the timeframe sufficient for an association to be seen?YNNNNYNNNNNNY
For exposures that can vary in amount or level, did the study examine different levels of the exposure as related to the outcome?YNYNAYNAYNAYYYYY
Were the exposure measures (independent variables) clearly defined, valid and reliable and implemented consistently across all study participants?YYYYYYYCDYYYYY
Was the exposure measured more than once over time?NYYNNYNNNNNNY