Skip to main content

Table 4 List of included studies with quality scores

From: Relationship between both cardiorespiratory and muscular fitness and health-related quality of life in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Study

Design

Assessment

1

2

3

4

5

Total score

Risk of bias

Andersen et al. [38]

Cs

CRF and MF

1

1

1

0

1

4

Low

Borras et al. [39]

Cs

CRF

1

0

1

0

0

2

High

Eddolls et al. [44]

Cs

CRF

1

0

1

1

0

3

Medium

Evaristo et al. [40]

Cs

CRF and MF

1

1

1

1

0

4

Low

Gálvez et al. [41]

Cs

CRF

1

1

1

0

0

3

Medium

Gerber et al. [21]

Cs

CRF

1

1

1

1

0

4

Low

Marques et al. [17]

Cs

CRF and MF

1

1

1

1

1

5

Low

Morales et al. [19]

Cs

CRF and MF

1

1

1

1

1

5

Low

Padilla-Moledo et al. [43]

Cs

CRF

1

1

1

1

1

5

Low

Palou et al. [18]

Cs

CRF

1

0

1

0

0

2

High

Redondo-Tébar et al. [20]

Cs

CRF and MF

1

1

1

1

1

5

Low

Saavedra et al. [42]

Cs

CRF

1

1

1

1

1

5

Low

  1. CRF Cardiorespiratory fitness, Cs Cross-sectional, MF Muscular fitness
  2. (1) Adequate description of the study sample (number of participants, mean age and sex); (2) Adequate assessment/reporting of HRQoL (measurement of the HRQoL construct and its domains by means of a validated questionnaire); (3) Adequate assessment of the physical fitness components (validity/reliability of the outcome measure reported and/or measurement procedure adequately described); (4) Adequate adjustment of confounders (at least sex and age); (5) Description of both the numbers and reasons for withdrawals and dropouts (participation rate at baseline at least 70%). “high risk = 0–2 score, “medium risk” = 3 score, and “low risk” = 4–5 score