Skip to main content

Table 2 Quality assessment of cross-sectional studies with AHRQ methodology checklist

From: The association between the triglyceride-glucose index and vitamin D status: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author (year)

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

(10)

(11)

Percent

Aludwan [35]

Y

Y

N

U

Y

Y

N

Y

N

U

U

5/11(45%)

Paredez [42]

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N

U

7/11(64%)

Jia [36]

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

N

Y

U

8/11(73%)

Mustafa [37]

Y

Y

Y

U

U

N

N

Y

U

Y

U

5/11(45%)

Xiang [38]

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

U

U

7/11(64%)

Liu [40]

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

N

Y

Y

N

U

7/11(64%)

Zhou [41]

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

Y

N

Y

U

8/11(73%)

  1. AHRQ, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; Y, Yes; N, No; U, Unclear
  2. [1] Define the source of information (survey, record review); [2] List inclusion and exclusion criteria for exposed and unexposed subjects (cases and controls) or refer to previous publications; [3] Indicate time period used for identifying patients; [4] Indicate whether or not subjects were consecutive if not population-based; [5] Indicate if evaluators of subjective components of study were masked to other aspects of the status of the participants; [6] Describe any assessments undertaken for quality assurance purposes (e.g., test/retest of primary outcome measurements); [7] Explain any patient exclusions from analysis; [8] Describe how confounding was assessed and/or controlled; [9] If applicable, explain how missing data were handled in the analysis; [10] Summarize patient response rates and completeness of data collection; [11] Clarify what follow-up, if any, was expected and the percentage of patients for which incomplete data or follow-up was obtained