deletions | additions       diff --git a/figures/Table 3- 1 page/caption.tex b/figures/Table 3- 1 page/caption.tex  index 70e0053..3c30f35 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.The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used most commonly for evaluating MQ/ROB at 22.99\% (20/87) followed by Jadad (20.69\%; 17/87). The Delphi List and the tool described by Sanderson et al were used 5.75\% (5/87) of the time. Studies using the tool described by Viswanathan and associates, SIGN, the Minckler Evidence Based Ratings System, the Long et al checklist, and tools falling under the other category were not evaluated for amount of the 43 quality components assessed.