Table 6 Results of the Quality Indicator Analysis for Group Experimental Design
| Author (Year) | Quality Indicator No. | (%) | Overall Quality |
| Participants | Intervention and Comparison Conditions | Outcome Measures | Data Analysis |
| 1* | 2* | 3* | 4 | 5* | 6* | 7 | 8 | 9* | 10* | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14* | 15* | 16 |
| Gantman et al. (2012) | O | O | O | O | O | O | O | O | O | O | X | X | X | O | O | O | 81 | A |
| Laugeson et al. (2015) | O | O | O | O | O | O | O | O | O | O | X | O | X | O | O | O | 88 | A |
| McVey et al. (2016) | O | O | O | O | O | X | X | O | O | O | X | X | X | O | O | O | 69 | NQ |
| Chien et al. (2021) | O | O | O | O | X | X | X | O | O | O | X | O | X | O | O | O | 69 | NQ |
| Moe et al. (2021) | O | N | O | O | O | X | X | N | O | O | X | X | X | O | O | O | 56 | NQ |
| Oh et al. (2021) | O | O | O | O | O | O | O | O | O | O | O | O | X | O | O | O | 94 | A |
| Rose et al. (2021) | O | N | O | X | O | X | X | N | O | O | X | X | X | O | O | O | 50 | NQ |
| Platos et al. (2023) | O | O | O | O | O | O | O | O | O | O | X | O | X | O | O | O | 88 | A |
| Harker et al. (2024) | O | O | O | O | O | X | X | O | O | X | X | X | X | X | O | O | 56 | NQ |
| Kim et al. (2025) | O | N | O | O | O | X | X | N | O | O | X | X | X | O | O | O | 56 | NQ |
| (%) | 100 | 70 | 100 | 90 | 90 | 40 | 40 | 70 | 100 | 90 | 10 | 40 | 0 | 90 | 100 | 100 | 71 | NQ |
| 90 | 60 | 48 | 97 |
Note. [N] Not Applicable [H] High Quality (Must meet 1-16), [A] AccepTable Quality (* Must meet Indicators), [NQ] Did not Meet Quality