84 Chapter 4 Stage 3. Study Selection The full texts of the remaining 16 articles were screened (S.K. and A.K.-P), and 5 articles were excluded as the studies were conference abstracts, with no relevant outcome and protocol of trial (Figure 1). To evaluate the methodological quality, all studies were critically appraised using the checklists developed by the Joanna Brigg’s Institute (JBI). RCTs were assessed with the JBI-tool developed for RCTs consisting of 13 items [34]. Non-randomised intervention studies and pre-test– post-test studies were assessed with the JBI-tool for Quasi-Experimental Studies (9 items) [34]. Cohort studies were appraised with the 11-item JBI-tool developed for cohort studies [35]. Two researchers (S.K. and A.K.-P.) critically assessed the methodological quality independently. Disagreements were discussed. Cohen’s Kappa statistics were calculated to test inter-rater reliability [44]. In case of any disagreement, the aim was to reach consensus with the help of a third researcher (N.B.) during a review meeting. Cross-referencing was applied to search for other relevant articles. Stage 4. Charting the Data Following the stages of Arksey and O’Malley [33], the next step was charting the data. In a systematic review, this process is called ‘data extraction’ and was done by two researchers (S.K. and A.K.-P). In this study, charting the data means recording information relating to the author(s); year of publication; study location; study populations; intervention type and control group (if available); duration of the intervention; aims of the study; methodology; measurement instrument; and important results. Stage 5. Collating, Summarizing and Reporting the Results The literature was thematically analysed and from this, groups of mental health disorders, for which the interventions were developed, were distinguished, e.g., SMI (not further specified), psychotic disorders, mood disorders, anxiety disorders, autism spectrum disorder, eating disorders, or substance abuse disorders [42]. The data was abstracted on article characteristics (author, total N, type of study, population, age, gender, type of oral health interventions, outcome, Measurement instrument, assessment time). Next, data on study design and results (intervention/ control group, intervention, comparator, results, effect) was summarised.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw