This section should detail the approach to critical appraisal, not the assessment results, and should be consistent with the protocol. Any deviations from the protocol must be reported and explained. The report should detail the criteria that were considered when determining the methodological quality of papers considered for inclusion in the review.
Critical appraisal tools must be appended to the review.
The primary and secondary reviewer should discuss each item of appraisal for each study design included in their review. The discussions should focus on what is considered acceptable to the needs of the review in terms of the specific study characteristics. The reviewers should be clear on what constitutes acceptable levels of information to allocate positive appraisal compared with a negative, or response of “unclear”. This discussion should take place before independently conducting the appraisal. The critical appraisal tool should be appended to the review.