From: Physical activity equivalent labeling vs. calorie labeling: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Num | Question item | Criteria | Answer |
---|---|---|---|
1 | Is the research has been conducted in real world? | Â | Low Risk of Bias High Risk of Bias Unclear |
2 | Is the randomization method described? | Age, Education, Socio-economic status, BMI | Low Risk of Bias High Risk of Bias Unclear |
3 | Are inclusion criteria have been mentioned? | Age, BMI, … | Low Risk of Bias High Risk of Bias Unclear |
4 | Are exclusion criteria have been mentioned? | Age, BMI, physical activity, dieting, Special diets such as vegetarian, pregnancy,… At least, 2 exclusion criteria should be mentioned. | Low Risk of Bias High Risk of Bias Unclear |
5 | Is the study generalizable? | According to Race, BMI, Age Students, Academic people | Low Risk of Bias High Risk of Bias Unclear |
6 | Are there any criteria to assess quality of participants’ responses? | At least one of these criteria shows quality assessment of responses:  - Very quick answers  - Uncompleted data related to outcome  - Assessment of hunger, desire to eat, before food selection and the amount of total calorie intake (in experimental researches)  - Including incentive for completeness | Low Risk of Bias High Risk of Bias Unclear |
7 | Is the questionnaire implemented in pilot phase? | Consumer views about menu diversity | Low Risk of Bias High Risk of Bias Unclear |
8 | Does the menu have enough variety? | According to carbohydrate, protein, and beverages (at least 1 sweetened beverages)  - If one of the groups not included in the menu, it should be mentioned as high risk of bias. | Low Risk of Bias High Risk of Bias Unclear |
9 | Are the differences of factors and their effects on primary outcome (question number 2) considered in statistical analysis? | Adjustment for age, education, socio-economic status, BMI | Low Risk of Bias High Risk of Bias Unclear |