Table 4 Quality appraisal of identified studies$
Study reference (country) | 1.Purpose/intended population | 2.Actual content (face validity) | 3.Item identification | 4.Item selection | 5.Uni-dimensionality | 6.Response scale | 7.Convergent validity | 8.Discriminant validity | 9.Predictive validity | 10.Test-rest reliability | 11.Responsiveness | Total QAF score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mellanby et al., 2003 (UK) | ✓✓ | ✓ | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | 3 |
Bowles et al., 2010 (New Zealand) | ✓ | ✓ | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | 2 |
Rau et al., 2010 (USA) | ✓✓ | ✓✓ | X | X | X | ✓ | X | X | X | X | X | 5 |
Lynch et al., 2011, UK* | ✓✓ | ✓✓ | ✓ | X | X | ✓ | X | X | X | X | X | 6 |
Hamilton et al., 2012 (USA)* | ✓✓ | X | X | X | X | ✓ | X | X | X | X | X | 3 |
Iliopoulou et al., 2013 (USA)* | ✓ | ✓ | X | X | X | ✓✓ | X | X | ✓ | X | ✓ | 6 |
Bianchi et al., 2021 (Italy) | ✓✓ | ✓✓ | X | X | X | ✓ | X | X | X | X | X | 5 |
Fournier et al., 2021 (UK) | ✓✓ | ✓✓ | X | X | X | ✓ | X | X | ✓ | X | X | 6 |
Jugan et al., 2021 (USA) | ✓✓ | ✓✓ | X | X | ✓ | ✓ | X | X | ✓ | X | X | 7 |
Matsuyama et al., 2021 (Japan) | ✓ | ✓ | X | X | X | ✓ | X | X | X | X | X | 3 |
Total for specific QAF criteria | 17 | 14 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | - |