The evidence was generally of poor quality, heterogeneity was high, and GRADE scores ranged from very low to high. Simple, but built upon a comprehensive framework allowing. effective based on a number of meta-analyses.34. Overall, the evidence suggests that sanitation is protective against diarrhea, active trachoma, some STH infections, schistosomiasis, and height-for-age, with no protective effect for other anthropometric outcomes. This article describes a meta analogy in order to illustrate to readers how low-code application development works. Despite the extensive research on literacy skill development. A total of 171 studies met the review’s inclusion criteria, including 64 studies not included in the previous reviews. We assessed risk of bias and quality of the evidence from intervention studies using the Liverpool Quality Appraisal Tool (LQAT) and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, respectively. We conducted meta-analyses to estimate pooled measures of effect using random-effects models and conducted subgroup analyses to assess impact of different levels of sanitation services and to explore sources of heterogeneity. We searched from the previous review’s end date to December 31, 2015. We updated previously published reviews by following their search strategy and eligibility criteria.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |