Skip to main content

Table 6 Critical appraisal scores, Kennelly [55] ratings, and ROB assessment based on modified Downs and Black [49]

From: The relationship between physical fitness attributes and sports injury in female, team ball sport players: a systematic review

Study author (year)

Critical appraisal score (out of 21)

Kennelly rating

Risk of bias

Achenbach et al. (2019) [95]

16

Good

Low

Aragon et al. (2012) [101]

15

Good

Low

Armstrong & Greig (2018) [104]

12

Fair

Low

Attenborough et al. (2017) [97]

14

Fair

High

Barber Foss et al. (2012) [85]

13

Fair

High

Beynnon et al. (2001) [61]

14

Fair

Low

Blokland et al. (2017) [62]

14

Fair

Low

Brumitt et al. (2019) [94]

16

Good

Low

Cheng et al. (2019) [63]

12

Fair

Low

Chorba et al. (2010) [64]

14

Fair

Low

Devan et al. (2004) [65]

10

Poor

Low

Edouard et al. (2013) [96]

14

Fair

Low

Emery et al. (2005) [67]

12

Fair

High

Emery & Meeuwisse (2006) [66]

12

Fair

High

Faude et al. (2006) [68]

15

Good

Low

Hägglund & Waldén (2016) [69]

14

Fair

Low

Hill et al. (2004) [102]

9

Poor

High

Hopper et al. (1995) [98]

15

Good

Low

Hopper (1997) [99]

14

Fair

Low

Koenig & Puckree (2015) [70]

14

Fair

Low

Kofotolis & Kellis (2007) [86]

17

Good

Low

Landis et al. (2018) [71]

12

Fair

High

McCann et al. (2018) [72]

14

Fair

High

Myer et al. (2008) [73]

12

Fair

Low

Ness et al. (2017) [74]

13

Fair

Low

Nilstad et al. (2014) [75]

17

Good

Low

Niyonsenga & Phillips (2013) [76]

16

Good

Low

O’Kane et al. (2017) [77]

15

Good

Low

Östenberg & Roos (2000) [78]

14

Fair

Low

Payne et al. [93]

12

Fair

High

Plisky et al. (2006) [87]

16

Good

Low

Räisänen et al. (2018) [79]

16

Good

Low

Shanley et al. (2011) [103]

16

Good

Low

Shimozaki et al. (2018) [88]

13

Fair

High

Smith et al. (2005) [100]

13

Fair

Low

Söderman et al. (2001) [80]

14

Fair

Low

Steffen et al. (2016) [81]

12

Fair

Low

Sugimoto et al. (2018) [82]

12

Fair

Low

van der Worp et al. (2012) [89]

14

Fair

Low

Vauhnik et al. (2008) [90]

13

Fair

Low

Walbright et al. (2017) [91]

12

Fair

High

Warren et al. (2019) [83]

13

Fair

Low

Watson et al. (2017) [84]

14

Fair

Low

Yentes et al. (2014) [92]

10

Poor

Low

  1. Modified Kennelly [55] rating determined by raw critical appraisal score (out of 21) to determine the overall methodological quality of each study as either poor (≤ 10), fair (11–14), or good (≥ 15). Risk of bias rating was determined by internal validity subset items on the Downs and Black checklist [49] (out of 6) as either low (≥ 4) or high (≤ 3)