What are the self-management experiences of the elderly with diabetes? A systematic review of qualitative research

Table 2 Critical appraisal skills program score and GRADE-confidence in the evidence from reviews of qualitative research relevance ratings

Ref.	1-Was there a clear statement of the aims of the research?	2-Is a qualitative methodology appropriate?	3-Was the research design appropriately addresses the aims of the research?	4-Was the recruitment strategy appropriate to the aims of the research?	5-Were data collected in a way that addresses the research issue?	6-Was the relationship between researcher and participants been considered?	7-Were ethical issues considered?	8-Was the data analysis sufficiently rigorous?	9-Was the statement of findings clear?	10-How valuable is the research?	Score	Relevance
Pamungkas et al[35], 2017	Yes	Yes	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	8.5	I
Joo and Lee[32], 2016	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	9	R
Song et al[31], 2010	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	9	R
Li et al[27], 2013	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	9.5	P
Bustillos and Sharkey[36], 2020	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	9	R
Beverly et al[28], 2014	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	7	P
George and Thomas[30], 2010	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	9	R
Washington and Wang-Letzkus[37], 2009	Yes	Yes	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	Yes	6.5	P
Carolan-Olah and Cassar[33], 2018	Yes	Yes	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	9.5	P
Tang et al[29], 2015	Yes	Yes	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	7.5	R

GRADE-confidence in the evidence from reviews of qualitative research relevance component: I: Indirect relevance; P: Partial relevance; R: Relevant; U: Uncertain relevance.