Table 5 Quality assessment of qualitative results (n = 15) using Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist
From: Determinants of intra-household food allocation between adults in South Asia – a systematic review
Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) quality indicator | No | Unable to determine | Yes | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
n | n | n | (%) | |
Was there a clear statement of the aims of the research (the goal, importance, and aims)? | 0 | 0 | 15 | (100) |
Is a qualitative methodology appropriate? | 0 | 0 | 15 | (100) |
Was the research design justified as appropriate to address the aims of the research? | 0 | 7 | 8 | (53) |
Was the recruitment strategy justified as being appropriate to the aims of the research (how and why respondents were sampled, or discussions of non-response)? | 0 | 7 | 8 | (53) |
Were the data collected in a way that addressed the research issue (detail and justification of methods, issues of data saturation)? | 0 | 9 | 6 | (40) |
Has the relationship between researcher and participants been adequately considered? | 0 | 9 | 6 | (40) |
Have ethical issues been considered (informed consent and ethical approval)? | 0 | 13 | 2 | (13) |
Was the data analysis sufficiently rigorous? | 0 | 10 | 5 | (33) |
Is there a clear statement of findings? | 1 | 0 | 14 | (93) |