Fig 1.
Six-step EB-COP systematic review process.
Table 1.
Criteria for assessment of fundamental quality indicators (QIs).
Fig 2.
COA quality indicators organized by purpose of use and level of obligation.
QIs were selected for each of the six COA applications. Mandatory QIs are shaded green, non-mandatory QIs (i.e., should be assessed if investigated) are shaded purple and QIs that are not relevant to a specific purpose are shaded red.
Table 2.
Quality indicators for grading and development of recommendations for COAs.
Fig 3.
Screenshot of the evidence question generated by the EB-COP.
The evidence question describes the context of use for which the COA will be tested. Contextual factors include descriptive characteristics of the sample, the chronicity of the condition, the purpose for which the COA has been selected and the concept of interest the COA purports to measure.
Fig 4.
Flow diagram for the GOSE abstract and full-text review process.
The EB-COP uses a two-step review process which begins with the abstract and progresses to full-text review. The arrows and numbers indicate the reasons articles were excluded from the review, and the number of articles that were excluded for each reason, respectively.