We excluded commentaries, narrative reviews, case series, qualitative and anthropological studies, and studies reporting prevalence estimates in children less than 10 years.
We excluded commentaries, editorials, news items, and nonresearch letters from EBM classification because such articles do not usually contain research evidence, are not always peer-reviewed, and the first 3 types are usually commissioned by journal editors.
We excluded commentaries, purely descriptive studies, genetic association studies, and meta-analyses.
We also excluded commentaries and papers solely focused on descriptions of curriculum development given the lack of a research component.
We will exclude commentaries, as well as reviews not involving human participants or not pertaining to healthcare.
This allows for the inclusion of empirical studies ranging from randomized controlled trials to qualitative studies, but excludes commentaries, editorials, historical articles, and letters.
We excluded commentaries, reports without a standardized assessment, assessments that evaluated only a specific type of health service (e.g. sexual and reproductive health, surgery, etc).
Although we excluded commentaries from the results of our review, a few are cited in order to provide documentation of particular considerations among the public health community.
Vātsyāyana says: 'It is well known that the absence of those things which exist is excluded' (commentary to NS 2.2.10).
We also excluded notes, commentaries, and editorials related to RMNCH and published in scientific journals.
