5.2.10.2 Assessment of quality

This section should focus on the quality as determined by the JBI SUMARI textual evidence critical appraisal checklist.¹¹ There should be a narrative summary of the overall quality of the included texts, which can be supported by a table showing the overall results of the quality assessment. This should be presented separately for each type of textual evidence; narrative, expert opinion or policy. The example below is the final critical appraisal checklist table for textual evidence: expert opinion. As discussed previously, the decision as to whether to exclude based on the quality assessment must be determined by the review team, prior to the conduct of the quality assessment, and reported in a transparent manner.

Table: JBI critical appraisal checklist for textual evidence: expert opinion

N: No, N/A: Not applicable, U: Unclear, Y: Yes. Values are indicative of Y (Yes) responses.
Q1: Is the source of the opinion clearly identified?
Q2: Does the source of the opinion have standing in the field of expertise?
Q3: Are the interests of the relevant population the central focus of the opinion?
Q4: Does the opinion demonstrate a logically defended argument to support the conclusions drawn?
Q5: Is there reference to the extant literature? Q6. Is any incongruence with the literature/sources logically defended?