Skip to main content

Table 3 MMAT

From: Use, adoption, and effectiveness of tippy-tap handwashing station in promoting hand hygiene practices in resource-limited settings: a systematic review

Name of study authorType of studyMethodological quality criteriaYesCommentsScore
Abass (2018) [16]Mixed methods5.1. Is the mixed methods research design relevant to address the qualitative and quantitative research questions (or objectives), or the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the mixed methods question (or objective)?Ynot clear75%
5.2. Is the integration of qualitative and quantitative data (or results*) relevant to address the research question (objective)?Y
5.3. Is appropriate consideration given to the limitations associated with this integration, e.g., the divergence of qualitative and quantitative data (or results*) in a triangulation design?N
Aiemjoy et al. 2017 [17]Quantitative cross sectional4.1. Is the sampling strategy relevant to address the quantitative research question (quantitative aspect of the mixed methods question)?Y 100%
4.2. Is the sample representative of the population understudy?Y
4.3. Are measurements appropriate (clear origin, or validity known, or standard instrument)?Y
4.4. Is there an acceptable response rate (60% or above)?Y
Biran (2011) [7]Qualitative1.1. Are the sources of qualitative data (archives, documents, informants, observations) relevant to address the research question (objective)?YNothing on analysis50%
1.2. Is the process for analysing qualitative data relevant to address the research question (objective)?N
1.3. Is appropriate consideration given to how findings relate to the context, e.g., the setting, in which the data were collected?Y
1.4. Is appropriate consideration given to how findings relate to researchers’ influence, e.g., through their interactions with participants?N
Breese et al., (2016) Qualitative1.1. Are the sources of qualitative data (archives, documents, informants, observations) relevant to address the research question (objective)?Y 100%
1.2. Is the process for analyzing qualitative data relevant to address the research question (objective)?Y
1.3. Is appropriate consideration given to how findings relate to the context, e.g., the setting, in which the data were collected?Y
1.4. Is appropriate consideration given to how findings relate to researchers’ influence, e.g., through their interactions with participants?Y
Cantrell, (2013) [19]Quantitative descriptive Survey4.1. Is the sampling strategy relevant to address the quantitative research question (quantitative aspect of the mixed methods question)?Y 100%
4.2. Is the sample representative of the population understudy?Y
4.3. Are measurements appropriate (clear origin, or validity known, or standard instrument)?Y
4.4. Is there an acceptable response rate (60% or above)? applicable, an acceptable response rate (60% or above), or an acceptableY
Chisanga et al. 2018 [20]Quantitative cross sectional4.1. Is the sampling strategy relevant to address the quantitative research question (quantitative aspect of the mixed methods question)?Y 100%
4.2. Is the sample representative of the population understudy?Y
4.3. Are measurements appropriate (clear origin, or validity known, or standard instrument)?Y
4.4. Is there an acceptable response rate (60% or above)?Y
Chiziwisano et al., 2019 Mixed methods5.1. Is the mixed methods research design relevant to address the qualitative and quantitative research questions (or objectives), or the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the mixed methods question (or objective)?Y 100%
5.2. Is the integration of qualitative and quantitative data (or results*) relevant to address the research question (objective)?Y
5.3. Is appropriate consideration given to the limitations associated with this integration, e.g., the divergence of qualitative and quantitative data (or results*) in a triangulation design?Y
Christensen et al. (2015) [22]Randomized controlled trial2.1. Is there a clear description of the randomization (or an appropriate sequence generation)?Y 100%
2.2. Is there a clear description of the allocation concealment (or blinding when applicable)?Y
2.3. Are there complete outcome data (80% or above)?Y
2.4. Is there low withdrawal/drop-out (below 20%)?Y
Contzen et al. (2015) [23]Quasi-experiment2.1. Is there a clear description of the randomization (or an appropriate sequence generation)?Y 75%
2.2. Is there a clear description of the allocation concealment (or blinding when applicable)?N
2.3. Are there complete outcome data (80% or above)?Y
2.4. Is there low withdrawal/drop-out (below 20%)?Y
Dajaan et al. (2018) [24]Quantitative
cross sectional
4.1. Is the sampling strategy relevant to address the quantitative research question (quantitative aspect of the mixed methods question)?Y 100%
4.2. Is the sample representative of the population understudy?Y
4.3. Are measurements appropriate (clear origin, or validity known, or standard instrument)?Y
4.4. Is there an acceptable response rate (60% or above)? applicable, an acceptable response rate (60% or above), or an acceptableY
Hurtado (1994) [25]Qualitative1. Are the sources of qualitative data (archives, documents, informants, observations) relevant to address the research question (objective)?Ynot clear75%
1.2. Is the process for analysing qualitative data relevant to address the research question (objective)?Y
1.3. Is appropriate consideration given to how findings relate to the context, e.g., the setting, in which the data were collected?Y
1.4. Is appropriate consideration given to how findings relate to researchers’ influence, e.g., through their interactions with participants?N
Kamuteera et al. 2018 [26]Quantitative cross sectional survey4.1. Is the sampling strategy relevant to address the quantitative research question (quantitative aspect of the mixed methods question)?Ynot clear75%
4.2. Is the sample representative of the population understudy?Y
4.3. Are measurements appropriate (clear origin, or validity known, or standard instrument)?Y
4.4. Is there an acceptable response rate (60% or above)? applicable, an acceptable response rate (60% or above), or an acceptableN
Mbuya et al., (2015) [27]Qualitative1.1. Are the sources of qualitative data (archives, documents, informants, observations) relevant to address the research question (objective)?Y 75%
1.2. Is the process for analyzing qualitative data relevant to address the research question (objective)?Y
1.3. Is appropriate consideration given to how findings relate to the context, e.g., the setting, in which the data were collected?Y
1.4. Is appropriate consideration given to how findings relate to researchers’ influence, e.g., through their interactions with participants?N
Musoke et all. 2018 [28]Mixed methods5.1. Is the mixed methods research design relevant to address the qualitative and quantitative research questions (or objectives), or the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the mixed methods question (or objective)?YSuperficial analysis procedures reported75%
5.2. Is the integration of qualitative and quantitative data (or results*) relevant to address the research question (objective)?Y
5.3. Is appropriate consideration given to the limitations associated with this integration, e.g., the divergence of qualitative and quantitative data (or results*) in a triangulation design?N
Mwakitalima (2018) [29]Quantitative cross sectional3.1. Are participants (organizations) recruited in a way that minimizes selection bias?Y5KM apart100%
3.2. Are measurements appropriate (clear origin, or validity known, or standard instrument; and absence of contamination between groups when appropriate) regarding the exposure/intervention and outcomes?Y
3.3. In the groups being compared (exposed vs. non-exposed; with intervention vs. without; cases vs. controls), are the participants comparable, or do researchers take into account (control for) the difference between these groups?Y
3.4. Are there complete outcome data (80% or above), and, when applicable, an acceptable response rate (60% or above), or an acceptable follow-up rate for cohort studies (depending on the duration of follow-up)?Y
Pietropaoli (2017) [30]Qualitative1.1. Are the sources of qualitative data (archives, documents, informants, observations) relevant to address the research question (objective)?YNothing on analysis50%
1.2. Is the process for analyzing qualitative data relevant to address the research question (objective)?N
1.3. Is appropriate consideration given to how findings relate to the context, e.g., the setting, in which the data were collected?Y
1.4. Is appropriate consideration given to how findings relate to researchers’ influence, e.g., through their interactions with participants?N
Shukla (2018) [31]Quantitative descriptive4.1. Is the sampling strategy relevant to address the quantitative research question (quantitative aspect of the mixed methods question)?YInfo not given75%
4.2. Is the sample representative of the population understudy?Y
4.3. Are measurements appropriate (clear origin, or validity known, or standard instrument)?Y
4.4. Is there an acceptable response rate (60% or above)?N
Singh et al. (2016) [32]Qualitative1.1. Are the sources of qualitative data (archives, documents, informants, observations) relevant to address the research question (objective)?Y 100%
1.2. Is the process for analysing qualitative data relevant to address the research question (objective)?Y
1.3. Is appropriate consideration given to how findings relate to the context, e.g., the setting, in which the data were collected?Y
1.4. Is appropriate consideration given to how findings relate to researchers’ influence, e.g., through their interactions with participants?Y
Singh et al. (2016b) [33]Randomised controlled trial2.1. Is there a clear description of the randomization (or an appropriate sequence generation)?Y 75%
2.2. Is there a clear description of the allocation concealment (or blinding when applicable)?N
2.3. Are there complete outcome data (80% or above)?Y
2.4. Is there low withdrawal/drop-out (below 20%)?Y
Zhang et al. (2013) [34]Randomized controlled trial2.1. Is there a clear description of the randomization (or an appropriate sequence generation)?Y 75%
2.2. Is there a clear description of the allocation concealment (or blinding when applicable)?N
2.3. Are there complete outcome data (80% or above)?Y
2.4. Is there low withdrawal/drop-out (below 20%)?Y
  1. *Both qualitative and quantitative results