2.4 Standards assessment
The COS-STAR was developed using a recommended approach for guiding
minimal COS study reporting. We assessed the reporting standards of
included COSs using the COS-STAR which contains 25 checklist criteria
spread over six domains namely; title/abstract, introduction, methods,
results, discussion, and other information. The responses for each item
included; “Yes - item fully compliant, partial - item not fully
compliant, or No - item not compliant. We further assessed the
methodological standards of included COSs used COS-STAD, which contains
12 checklist criteria spread over three domains namely; scope
specification, stakeholders involved, and consensus process. These three
are considered the minimum design recommendations for all COSs
development. To indicate the degree of compliance, each checklist item
was defined as: Yes - for total addressed; Partial - for partial
addressed; and No - for not addressed. Assessments were compared, and
three authors (J.Y.S. M.L.Y., and Y.G.) deliberated on how the process
should be applied. The reporting standards assessment using the COS-STAR
tool was independently conducted by two independent reviewers (J.Y.S.
and M.L.Y.). Similarly, the methodological standards assessment using
the COS-STAD checklist was independently conducted by two reviewers
(J.Y.S and Y.G). Conflicts were adjudicated by a third reviewer
(J.H.Z.). This article is not intended to criticize the quality of the
published COSs. Therefore, we only report the compliance rates of items
included in the literature, but do not score the standards of individual
studies.