|Prompts||Absent, unidentifiable (Score = 0)||Not Clear or Vague, partial (Score = 1)||Clear, well described (Score = 2)|
|(AO) Are the aims and objectives of the research clearly stated?||No clear statement of aims and objectives.||Aims and objectives implied, but difficult to discern.||Aims and objectives explicitly stated and easily identifiable.|
|(DES) Is the research design clearly specified and appropriate for the aims and objectives of the research?||Study design does not align with aims and objectives.|
Little to no description of methodological approach provided.
|Study design somewhat aligned with aims and objectives.|
Some description of methodology provided, but with gaps or use of generic language used to describe methodology (e.g., ‘qualitative’).
|Study design aligns with aims and objectives.|
Methodological approach and theoretical foundation clearly described.
|(MET) Do the researchers provide a clear account of the process by which their findings were produced?||No clear description of study process of data generation, making it impossible to replicate study.||Data generation and analytical processes vaguely described— would be difficult to replicate study.||Methods and analytical process clearly described, consistent with methodological approach and theoretical foundation— would be possible to replicate study.|
|(D) Do the researchers display enough data to support their interpretations and conclusions?||Insufficient data presented to support authors’ claims.||Difficult to discern if data is sufficient to support authors’ claims.||Data presented is compelling and clearly supports authors’ claims.|
|(AN) Is the method of analysis appropriate and adequately explicated?||Analytical processes inadequate or absent; not clearly or coherently linked to conclusions.||Analytical processes vaguely described; difficult to determine coherency with study design and findings.||Analytical process well described, coherent with methodology, and logically connected to authors’ conclusions.|