Table 3 Quality assessment of included studies (Ratings for each of the scales included in the review (1 if done and 0 if not done))
From: Women empowerment in reproductive health: a systematic review of measurement properties
Author, year | Followed an a priori explicit theoretical framework | Reported efforts towards content validation | Exploratory factor analysis | Confirmatory factor analysis | Relationships with theoretically related construct (external construct validity) | Reliability scores above 0.7 | Total score | Interpretation, ≤ 2 = poor quality; 3–4 = medium quality; 5–6 = high quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Upadhyay et al. 2020 [11] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | Medium quality |
Upadhyay et al. 2014 [24] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | Medium quality |
Hinson et al. 2019 [12] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 | Medium quality |
Moreau et al. 2020 [13] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | Medium quality |
McCauley et al. 2017 [25] | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 | Poor quality |
Morokoff et al. 2010 [5] | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | Medium quality |
Santos-Iglesias and Carlos Sierra 2010 [32] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 | High quality |
Loshek and Terrell 2014 [26] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 | High quality |
Jones 2006 [7] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 5 | High quality |
Jones and Gulick 2009 [8] | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | High quality |
Pulerwitz et al. 2000 [6] | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | Poor quality |
Pulerwitz et al. 2018 [29] | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | Medium quality |
Bhandari et al. 2014 [27] | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4 | Medium quality |
Closson et al. 2019 [30] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | Medium quality |
Asaolu et al. 2018 [31] | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4 | Medium quality |