Review Article
Bacterial Pathogens and Their Antimicrobial Resistance Patterns of Inanimate Surfaces and Equipment in Ethiopia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Table 1
Quality assessment of included studies using JBI’s critical appraisal tools.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Y: yes; N: no; U: unclear; Q: question. The overall score is calculated by counting the number of Y’s in each row (scores of five and above were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis). Q1 = was the sample frame appropriate to address the target population? 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 for the identification of the condition? Q7 = was the condition measured in a standard, 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? |