Skip to main content

Table 1 Methodological appraisal of studies

From: Implementation effectiveness of health interventions for indigenous communities: a systematic review

Observational Studies

Benyshek et al., 2013

Christohper et al., 2008

Coppell et al., 2009

Kaholokula et al., 2014

Kakekagumick et al., 2013

Reilly et al., 2011

Shah et al., 2015

1) Was the study based on a random or pseudo-random sample?

N

Y

Y

N

N

N

N

2) Were the criteria for inclusion in the sample clearly defined?

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

3) Were confounding factors identified and strategies to deal with them stated?

N

N

S

Y

N

Y

N

4) Were outcomes assessed using objective criteria?

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

5) If comparisons are being made, was there sufficient description of the groups?

N/A

N/A

Y

Y

N/A

N/A

N/A

6) Was follow up carried out over a sufficient time period?

S

Y

Y

S

Y

Y

S

7) Were the outcomes of people who withdrew described and included in the analysis?

Y

N

N/A

N

N

N/A

N/A

8) Were outcomes measured in a reliable way?

Y

S

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

9) Was appropriate statistical analysis used?

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

Total

11/16

9/16

15/16

13/18

8/16

8/14

9/14

Randomised Control Trial

Brimblecombe et al. 2017

Canuto et al. 2012

Ho et al. 2008

Kaholokula et al. 2012

Karanja et al. 2010

Kolahdooz et al. 2014

Mendham et al. 2015

Simmons et al. 2008

Sinclair et al., 2013

Tomayko et al. 2016

1) Was the assignment to treatment groups truly random?

Y

Y

N

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

S

2) Were participants blinded to treatment allocation?

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

3) Was allocation to treatment groups concealed from the allocator?

Y

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

Y

N

4) Were the outcomes of people who withdrew described and included in the analysis?

N/A

Y

N

Y

N

N

N

N

Y

Y

5) Were those assessing outcomes blind to the treatment allocation?

Y

Y

N

U

N

N

N

N

N

N

6) Were the control and treatment groups comparable at entry?

Y

S

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

7) Were groups treated identically other than for the named interventions?

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

8) Were outcomes measured in the same way for all groups?

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

Y

9) Were outcomes measured in a reliable way?

Y

Y

S

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

10) Was appropriate statistical analyses used?

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

S

Y

Y

Total

18/18

15/20

9/20

14/20

10/20

12/20

12/20

9/20

16/20

13/20

Qualitative Studies

English et al., 2008

Sushames et al. 2017

Townsend et al. 2016

Tumiel Behalter et al. 2011

1) Is there congruency between the stated philosophical perspective between the research and the methodology?

Y

Y

Y

Y

2) Is there congruity between the research methodology and the research question or objectives?

Y

S

Y

S

3) Is there congruity between the research methodology and the methods used to collect data?

Y

Y

S

S

4) Is there congruity between the research methodology and the representation and analysis of data?

S

Y

N

N

5) Is there congruity between the research methodology and the interpretation of results?

Y

Y

Y

S

6) Is there a statement locating the researcher culturally or theoretically?

N

N

N

N

7) Is the influence of the researcher on the research and vice versa addressed?

N

N

N

N

8) Are participants and their voices, adequately represented?

S

Y

Y

N

9) Is the research ethical according to current criteria or, for recent studies, is there evidence of ethical approval by an appropriate body?

S

S

S

S

10) Do the conclusions drawn in the research report flow from the analysis or interpretation of the data?

Y

Y

Y

S

Total

13/20

14/20

12/20

7/20

  1. Y Yes, S Somewhat, N No, U Unclear, N/A Not applicable; Yes scored two, somewhat one; No and unclear are zero with not applicable removed from totals