Table 6 MOOSE Checklist
Item No | Recommendation | Reported on Page No |
|---|---|---|
Reporting of background should include | ||
1 | Problem definition | 2 |
2 | Hypothesis statement | 2 |
3 | Description of study outcome(s) | 2 |
4 | Type of exposure or intervention used | 2 |
5 | Type of study designs used | 2 |
6 | Study population | 2 |
Reporting of search strategy should include | ||
7 | Qualifications of searchers (eg, librarians and investigators) | 2 |
8 | Search strategy, including time period included in the synthesis and key words | 2 |
9 | Effort to include all available studies, including contact with authors | 3 |
10 | Databases and registries searched | 2-3 |
11 | Search software used, name and version, including special features used (eg, explosion) | Not applicable. No search software was used |
12 | Use of hand searching (eg, reference lists of obtained articles) | 3 |
13 | List of citations located and those excluded, including justification | Table 2 (page 5) and Table 5 (page 10–17) |
14 | Method of addressing articles published in languages other than English | 3 |
15 | Method of handling abstracts and unpublished studies | 3 |
16 | Description of any contact with authors | 3 |
Reporting of methods should include | ||
17 | Description of relevance or appropriateness of studies assembled for assessing the hypothesis to be tested | 3 |
18 | Rationale for the selection and coding of data (eg, sound clinical principles or convenience) | 3. No coding of data was required |
19 | Documentation of how data were classified and coded (eg, multiple raters, blinding and interrater reliability) | 4 No coding of data was required |
20 | Assessment of confounding (eg, comparability of cases and controls in studies where appropriate) | 9 (matching of cases and controls done in few included studies) |
21 | Assessment of study quality, including blinding of quality assessors, stratification or regression on possible predictors of study results | 4 |
22 | Assessment of heterogeneity | Not applicable |
23 | Description of statistical methods (eg, complete description of fixed or random effects models, justification of whether the chosen models account for predictors of study results, dose-response models, or cumulative meta-analysis) in sufficient detail to be replicated | Not applicable |
24 | Provision of appropriate tables and graphics | Tables given |
Reporting of results should include | ||
25 | Graphic summarizing individual study estimates and overall estimate | Not applicable |
26 | Table giving descriptive information for each study included | Table 5 (page 10–17) |
27 | Results of sensitivity testing (eg, subgroup analysis) | Not applicable |
28 | Indication of statistical uncertainty of findings | Not applicable |
Reporting of discussion should include | ||
29 | Quantitative assessment of bias (eg, publication bias) | Not applicable. This is a qualitative systematic review |
30 | Justification for exclusion (eg, exclusion of non-English language citations) | 3 & 5 (Table 2) |
31 | Assessment of quality of included studies | 6-8 (Table 3), 22 |
Reporting of conclusions should include | ||
32 | Consideration of alternative explanations for observed results | 22 |
33 | Generalization of the conclusions (ie, appropriate for the data presented and within the domain of the literature review) | 22 |
34 | Guidelines for future research | 22 |
35 | Disclosure of funding source | Not applicable |