deletions | additions       diff --git a/figures/Table 3- 1 page/caption.tex b/figures/Table 3- 1 page/caption.tex  index 49fd095..748a952 100644  --- a/figures/Table 3- 1 page/caption.tex  +++ b/figures/Table 3- 1 page/caption.tex 
...
Of the 87 reviews that conducted a MQ/ROB assessment, 73 used a previously published tool to evaluate MQ/ROB. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, Jadad, the Delphi List, the tool decribed by Sanderson et al, QUADAS, QUADAS-2, Downs and Black, CASP (for RCTs), and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale were among the most commonly used tools in our included studies.  A total of 43 quality measures were evaluated between all tools (see Table 3). The Downs and Black tool was the most extensive, assessed 62.79\% (27/43) quality measures, and was used in 4.60\% (4/87) of reviews that evaluated MQ/ROB. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (for randomized controlled trails) both assessed 34.88\% (15/43) of the quality items, and were also both used in 4.60\% (4/87) of reviews. QUADAS-2 and QUADAS assessed 32.56\% (14/43) and 30.23\% (13/43) of quality measures, respectfully. QUADAS was used in 5.75\% (5/87) of studies, while QUADAS-2 was used in 4.60\% (4/87). Sanderson et al (27.91\%; 12/43), Jadad (27.91\%; 12/43), the Delphi List (18.60\%; 8/43) and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool (16.28\%; 7/43) evaluated the least amount of quality measures.