Studies were critically appraised using the CASP appraisal tool.
Twelve publications were appraised using the Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice Research Evidence Appraisal Tool.
Studies deemed eligible were appraised using the McMaster Critical Review Form.
Randomised trials will be appraised using the Jadad scale, 15 while non-randomised/observational studies will be appraised using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale, 16 and systematic reviews will be appraised using the Assessing the Quality of Systematic Reviews AMSTARR) criteria.
The three eligible papers all used qualitative research methods and were considered to be of acceptable quality in terms of methodology, analysis, interpretation and relevance when appraised using the CASP framework for qualitative research [ 38].
Forty papers were appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) tool for qualitative research [ 33], and Pluye et al.'s [ 34] scoring system was used to assess the non-experimental and mixed method studies.
Study quality was appraised using a mixed methods research scoring system developed by Kmet, which proposes assessment criteria for evaluating primary research papers from a variety of fields (see additional file 2).
The validity of the quantitative data findings has been appraised using qualitative data collected in ten exploratory interviews.
The quality of retrieved papers was appraised using standard tools.
The methodological quality of these articles was appraised using a standard tool.
