Sentence examples for papers were assessed using from inspiring English sources

The methodological quality of the eight research papers were assessed using established critical appraisal checklists, in this case the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) [ 31].

The correctness, robustness, efficiency and relevance [ 7] of the statistical methods reported in the sample papers were assessed using a yes or no assignment for each characteristic.

The quality of the papers was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) assessment tool for qualitative research.

The quality of the papers was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) assessment tool for qualitative research, as outlined in Electronic Supplementary Material (ESM Onlinee Resource 1 [ 11].

Quality of retrieved papers was assessed using a 27-item tool for the assessment of quantitative studies recommended in the NICE methods manual [ 12] (see also Supporting Information, Appendix S1).

Quality of papers was assessed using the Downs & Black's checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomized and non-randomized studies of health care interventions, which systematically assesses quality of reporting on issues ranging from research aims, power calculations, intervention, and outcome instruments [ 35].

The methodological quality of included papers was assessed using the PRIMARK (Reporting Recommendations for Tumor Marker Prognostic Studies) assessment tool.

The quality of papers was assessed using the checklist developed by Dixon-Woods et al. 17 This assessment was based mainly on clarity, consideration of ethical issues, and transferability of the sample data and analysis across different settings.

The quality of the papers was assessed using the Cochrane Back Review Risk of Bias criteria.

Each of the papers was assessed using the PEDro scale methodology by both reviewers, with the pre-defined cutoff [ 4].

Quality of the papers was assessed using the criteria of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions guidelines to assess potential bias.