Skip to main content

Table 2 Critical assessment of methodological quality of studies included in the systematic review

From: Deficiency of B vitamins in women of childbearing age, pregnant, and lactating women in Brazil: a systematic review

 

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Q7

Q8a

Q9

Barbosa, 2008 [26]

U

N/A

Barnabé, 2014 [27]

N/A

Cavalcanti, 2018 [28]

N/A

Donangelo, 1989 [29]

N/A

Oliveira, 2017 [30]

N/A

N/A

Paiva, 2003 [31]

N/A

Palchetti, 2017 [32]

N/A

Palchetti, 2022 [33]

N/A

Pinto, 1973 [34]

N/A

Santos, 2016 [35]

U

N/A

Steluti, 2014 [36]

N/A

Tavares, 2004 [37]

U

N/A

Tedesco, 2016 [38]

N/A

U

N/A

Total (%)

46.2

7.7

30.8

30.8

100

100

38.5

0

61.5

  1. Q1 — Was the sample frame appropriate to address the target population (women of childbearing age, pregnant women, or lactating women from a specific location/city/state/region of Brazil)? Q2 — Were study participants sampled in an appropriate way? Q3 — Was the sample size adequate? Q4 — Were the study subjects and the setting described in detail? Q5 –— Was the data analysis conducted with sufficient coverage of the identified sample? Q6 — Were valid methods used to identify the deficiency of the B complex vitamin studied? Q7 — Was the vitamin B complex deficiency studied and measured in a standard and reliable way for all participants? Q8 — Was there appropriate statistical analysis? Q9 — Was the response rate adequate, and, if not, was the low response rate managed appropriately?
  2. yes, ✘ no, N/A not applicable, U unclear
  3. aAll were rated as “NOT APPLICABLE,” as statistical data were not extracted; only the number of cases and individuals was evaluated. The prevalence was subsequently calculated