“For and against” factors influencing participation in personalized breast cancer screening programs: a qualitative systematic review until March 2022

Table 1 Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) evaluation of the studies included in the review of factors influencing participation in personalized breast cancer screening, until March 2022

No	Article	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
1	29	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Can’t tell	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	NMC
2	22	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	NMC
3	24	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	Can’t tell	Can’t Tell	MC
4	23	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes	NMC
5	25	Yes	Yes	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes	Yes	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes	NMC
6	26	Yes	Yes	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes	Yes	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes	NMC
7	31	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	NC
8	18	Yes	Yes	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes	Yes	Yes	NMC
9	29	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	NC
10	28	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	NC
11	32	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Can’t tell	No	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes	NMC
12	33	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Can’t tell	Yes	Yes	Yes	NC
13	27	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Can’t Tell	Yes	NC
14	35	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	NC
15	36	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	NC
16	38	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	NC
17	34	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	Can’t Tell	MC
18	37	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	No	MC

1. Was there a clear statement of the aims of the research?
2. Is a qualitative methodology appropriate?
3. Was the research design appropriate to address the aims of the research?
4. Was the recruitment strategy appropriate to the aims of the research?
5. Were the data collected in a way that addressed the research issue?
6. Was the relationship between researcher and participants adequately addressed?
7. Have ethical issues been taken into account?
8. Was the data analysis sufficiently rigorous?
9. Is there a clear statement of findings?
10. How valuable is the research?
NC No concerns, NMC No or very minor concerns, MC Moderate concerns

ISSN: 2049-3258