Skip to main content

Table 2 Quality assessment tool for observational cohort and cross-sectional studies

From: Internal Training Load Perceived by Athletes and Planned by Coaches: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

References

Item 1

Item 2

Item 3

Item 4

Item 5

Item 6

Item 7

Item 8

Item 9

Item 10

Item 11

Item 12

Item 13

Item 14

Scores

Andrade et al. [44]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

4/8

Andrade Nogueira et al. [25]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Barnes et al. [19]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

Yes

6/8

Barroso et al. [26]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Barroso et al. [38]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Brink et al. [5]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Brink et al. [39]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

Yes

6/8

Cruz et al. [27]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Doeven et al. [40]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Figueiredo et al. [15]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

Yes

6/8

Foster et al. [17]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Ieno et al. [28]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Imamura et al. [41]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Inoue et al. [29]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Kraft et al. [30]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Lupo et al. [45]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

Yes

6/8

Medina et al. [42]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

No

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

4/8

Murphy et al. [49]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

Yes

6/8

Nogueira et al. [31]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Oytun et al. [46]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Rabelo et al. [20]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Redkva et al. [16]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Rodrigues-Marroyo et al. [47]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Scantlebury et al. [32]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

Yes

6/8

Sinnott-O'Connor et al. [33]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Vaquera et al. [43]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Viveiros et al. [48]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Voet et al. [34]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

Wallace et al. [18]

Yes

Yes

NA

Yes

Yes

No

No

NA

NA

NA

Yes

NA

NA

No

5/8

  1. Item 1: Was the research question or objective in this paper clearly stated?; Item 2: Was the study population clearly specified and defined?; Item 3: Was the participation rate of eligible persons at least 50%?; Item 4: Were all the subjects selected or recruited from the same or similar populations (including the same time period)? Were inclusion and exclusion criteria for being in the study prespecified and applied uniformly to all participants?; Item 5: Was a sample size justification, power description, or variance and effect estimates provided?; Item 6: For the analyses in this paper, were the exposure(s) of interest measured prior to the outcome(s) being measured?; Item 7: Was the timeframe sufficient so that one could reasonably expect to see an association between exposure and outcome if it existed?; Item 8: For exposures that can vary in amount or level, did the study examine different levels of the exposure as related to the outcome (e.g., categories of exposure, or exposure measured as continuous variable)?; Item 9: Were the exposure measures (independent variables) clearly defined, valid, reliable, and implemented consistently across all study participants?; Item 10: Was the exposure(s) assessed more than once over time?; Item 11: Were the outcome measures (dependent variables) clearly defined, valid, reliable, and implemented consistently across all study participants?; Item 12: Were the outcome assessors blinded to the exposure status of participants?; Item 13: Was loss to follow-up after baseline 20% or less?; Item 14: Were key potential confounding variables measured and adjusted statistically for their impact on the relationship between exposure(s) and outcome(s)?; NA: Not applicable. Items 6 and 7 were answered with “No” in all 29 studies according to the guidelines of the National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. Items 3, 8, 9, 10, 12, and 13 were considered not applicable to the cross-sectional studies included in this review