Information missed in extraction | |
a. | Missed information in text |
b. | Missed information in in-text or summary tables in appendices |
c. | Missed information in a multi-dimensional measure |
Information on target variables and processes being unclear | |
a. | Lack of justification provided for target variables |
b. | In some instances it was unclear whether a target variable was defined on the basis of information present or absent in primary studies |
c. | Information provided in the review made it difficult to assign the target variable to a response category |
d. | In the absence of intervention theories or models linking intervention strategies to process, impacts and outcomes, it was difficult to interpret some variables |
Limitations of the tool | |
a. | Definitions in the tool did not adequately capture the heterogeneity in the target variable |
b. | Target variable has a two-part question which can lead to inconsistent ratings |
c. | Response category definitions |
d. | Definitions of the term is too narrow |
e. | Multiple indicators for a single measure |
f. | Reviews with one primary study |
Limitations of the review | |
a. | Inconsistency in the presentation of target variable in the review |
b. | Location of information in the review not in expected sections |
c. | Lack of sub-headings |
d. | Tables of summary characteristics |