Study identification  (Include author, title, year of publication, journal title, pages)

Guideline topic:

Key Question No:

Before completing this checklist, consider:

• Is the paper a systematic review or meta-analysis? IF NO REJECT (give reason below). IF YES CONTINUE.
• Is the paper relevant to key question? Analyse using PICO (Patient or Population Intervention Comparison Outcome). IF NO REJECT (give reason below). IF YES complete the checklist.

Reason for rejection: 1. Paper not a systematic review/meta-analysis   2. Paper not relevant to key question
3. Other reason  (please specify):

Checklist completed by:

Section 1:  Internal validity

In a well conducted systematic review

1.1

The study addresses an appropriate and clearly focused question.

Well covered
Adequately addressed
Poorly addressed

Not addressed
Not reported
Not applicable

1.2

A description of the methodology used is included.

Well covered
Adequately addressed
Poorly addressed

Not addressed
Not reported
Not applicable

1.3

The literature search is sufficiently rigorous to identify all the relevant studies.

Well covered
Adequately addressed
Poorly addressed

Not addressed
Not reported
Not applicable

1.4

Study quality is assessed and taken into account.

Well covered
Adequately addressed
Poorly addressed

Not addressed
Not reported
Not applicable

1.5

There are enough similarities between the studies selected to make combining them reasonable.

Well covered
Adequately addressed
Poorly addressed

Not addressed
Not reported
Not applicable

Section 2: OVERALL ASSESSMENT OF THE STUDY

2.1

2.2

Notes. Summarise the authors conclusions. Add any comments on your own assessment of the study, and the extent to which it answers your question.