Table 3 Youth Stigma in India: Risk of bias assessment (Y Yes, N No, NA Not applicable, NR Not reported)
Studies (1–10) ➔ | Abraham et al., 2014 [33] | Aggarwal et al., 2016 [34] | Ahuja et al., 2017 [35] | Bell et al., 2010 [36] | Bell et al., 2008 [37] | Bhise et al., 2016 [38] | Chawla et al., 2012 [39] | D’Sa et al., 2016 [40] | Etzersdorfer et al., 1998 [41] | Gulati et al., 2014 [42] |
1. Was the research question or objective clearly stated? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y |
2. Was the study population clearly specified and defined? | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y |
3. Was the participation rate of eligible persons at least 50%? | NR | Y | NR | Y | Y | Y | NR | Y | Y | Y |
4. Were all subjects selected or recruited from the same or similar populations? | N | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y |
5. Was a sample size justification, power description, or variance and effect estimates provided? | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | N | N |
6. Were exposure(s) of interest measured prior to the outcome(s) being measured? | N | N | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
7. Was the timeframe sufficient so that one could reasonably expect to see an association between exposure and outcome if it existed? | NR | NR | NR | NR | NA | NA | NR | NA | NR | NR |
8. For exposures that can vary in amount or level, did the study examine different levels of the exposure as related to the outcome? | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | N | Y | NR | Y | Y |
9. Were exposure measures clearly defined, valid, reliable, and implemented consistently across all participants? | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | N | NR | N | Y |
10. Was the exposure(s) assessed more than once over time? | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N |
11. Were the outcome measures clearly defined, valid, reliable, and implemented consistently across all participants? | Â | N | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y |
12. Were outcome assessors blinded to the exposure status of participants? | Y | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N |
13. Was loss to follow-up after baseline 20% or less? | NA | NA | NA | NA | Y | Y | NA | Y | NA | NA |
14. Were key potential confounding variables measured and adjusted statistically for their impact on the relationship between exposure(s) and outcome(s)? | Y | Y | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N |
Quality rating [Good (G); Fair (F); Poor (P)] | F | G | P | F | G | G | P | F | F | G |
Studies (11–21)➔ | Hiremath & Wale, 2017 [43] | Joshi et al., 2012 [44] | Kalra, 2012 [61] | Kodakandla et al., 2016 [45] | Madhan et al., 2012 [46] | Mahto et al., 2009 [47] | Mehrotra et al., 2013 [62] | Nebhinani et al., 201 [49] | Nebhinani et al., 2017 [48] | Poreddi et al., 2016 [50] |
1. Was the research question or objective clearly stated? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y |
2. Was the study population clearly specified and defined? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y |
3. Was the participation rate of eligible persons at least 50%? | N | NR | Y | NR | NR | NR | Y | Y | NR | Y |
4. Were all subjects selected or recruited from the same or similar populations? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y |
5. Was a sample size justification, power description, or variance and effect estimates provided? | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N |
6. Were exposure(s) of interest measured prior to the outcome(s) being measured? | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | N |
7. Was the timeframe sufficient so that one could reasonably expect to see an association between exposure and outcome if it existed? | NR | NA | NA | NA | NR | NR | NR | N | NR | N |
8. For exposures that can vary in amount or level, did the study examine different levels of the exposure as related to the outcome? | Y | NR | NR | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | N |
9. Were exposure measures clearly defined, valid, reliable, and implemented consistently across all participants? | N | N | N | Y | N | N | Y | N | N | N |
10. Was the exposure(s) assessed more than once over time? | N | N | NA | N | N | N | N | N | N | N |
11. Were the outcome measures clearly defined, valid, reliable, and implemented consistently across all participants? | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
12. Were outcome assessors blinded to the exposure status of participants? | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N |
13. Was loss to follow-up after baseline 20% or less? | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
14. Were key potential confounding variables measured and adjusted statistically for their impact on the relationship between exposure(s) and outcome(s)? | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N |
Quality rating [Good (G); Fair (F); Poor (P)] | F | P | P | G | P | P | F | F | F | F |
Studies (21–30)➔ | Poreddi et al., 2017 [51] | Poreddi et al., 2015 [52] | Prasad & Theodore, 2016 [53] | Ram et al., 2017 [54] | Roy et al., 2017 [55] | Shanthi et al., 2015 [56] | Sureka et al., 2016 [57] | Thakur & Olive, 2016 [58] | Thomas et al., 2015 [59] | Vijayalakshmi et al., 2013 [60] |
1. Was the research question or objective clearly stated? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
2. Was the study population clearly specified and defined? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
3. Was the participation rate of eligible persons at least 50%? | Y | Y | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR | NR |
4. Were all subjects selected or recruited from the same or similar populations? | Y | Y | Y | NR | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y |
5. Was a sample size justification, power description, or variance and effect estimates provided? | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N |
6. Were exposure(s) of interest measured prior to the outcome(s) being measured? | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | N |
7. Was the timeframe sufficient to reasonably expect an association between exposure and outcome, if it existed? | NR | NR | NR | NR | N | N | N | N | N | N |
8. For exposures that can vary in amount or level, did the study examine different levels of the exposure as related to the outcome? | N | N | Y | Y | N | N | N | NR | Y | N |
9. Were exposure measures clearly defined, valid, reliable, and implemented consistently across all participants? | Y | N | N | Y | N | N | N | NR | N | N |
10. Was the exposure(s) assessed more than once over time? | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N |
11. Were outcome measures clearly defined, valid, reliable, and implemented consistently across all participants? | Y | Y | N | Y | N | NR | Y | N | N | Y |
12.Were outcome assessors blinded to the exposure status of participants? | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | N |
13. Was loss to follow-up after baseline 20% or less? | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
14. Were key potential confounding variables measured and adjusted statistically for their impact? | Y | Y | N | N | N | N | N | Y | N | N |
Quality rating [Good (G); Fair (F); Poor (P)] | G | G | F | G | P | P | P | P | P | P |