Table 2 Study characteristics of the included systematic reviews and meta-analyses

You et al. 2014 [43]

MA

C

US

1980–2012

n = 8

CC = 2; CS = 6

Recognition of bias by sensitivity analysis

... conduct a meta-analysis of existing studies to evaluate the evidence of the relationship between wrist posture at work and CTS

Mediouni et al. 2014 [42]

MA

B

FR

1992–2012

n = 6

C = 2; CS = 4

Strengths and limitations acknowledged

... conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the available epidemiological data on the association between computer work exposure and CTS

Barcenilla et al. 2012 [41]

MA

B

AU

1980–2009

n = 37

C = 3; CC = 5; CS = 28

Risk of Bias Tool

... examine the association between workplace exposure and CTS by meta-analysis, with respect to exposure to hand force, repetition, vibration and wrist posture

Spahn et al. 2012 (in German) [31]

MA

C

DE

≤2011

n = 55

n/a

n/a

... conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify associated and risk factors for CTS in the occupational setting

Van Rijn et al. 2009 [35]

SR

B

NL

1966–2007

n = 44

C = 5; CC = 9; CS = 30

16-item score

... provide a quantitative assessment of the exposure-response relationship between work-related physical and psychosocial factors and the occurrence of CTS in occupational populations

Lozano-Calderón et al. 2008 [46]

SR

D

US

≤2008

n = 51^a; n = 33^b; (total = 66)

C = 7^a; CC = 12^a; C = 29^a; Other = 3^a

Bradford Hill criteria for causation

... evaluate the quality and strength of scientific evidence supporting an aetiological relationship between a disease and a proposed risk factor, using a scoring system based on the Bradford Hill criteria for causal association – example of CTS

Thomsen et al. 2008 [45]

SR

C

DK

≤2004

n = 8

C = 4; CC = 2; CS = 2

Selected criteria (4 main domains)

... conduct a systematic review to examine evidence for an association between computer work and CTS

Palmer et al. 2007 [22]

SR

C

GB

≤2004

n = 38

n/a

n/a

... conduct a systematic review to assess occupational risk factors for CTS

Sulsky et al. 2005 [44]

SR

C

DE

1997–2003

n = 34

C = 10; CC = 2; CS = 22

Selected criteria (6 main domains)

... clarify the relationship between CTS and occupation using quality based criteria from the epidemiological literature

Abbas et al. 1998 [21]

MA

D

US

1980–1995

n = 17

C = 3; CC = 4; CS = 10

n/a

... conduct a meta-analysis on work-related CTS and to identify risk estimates and possible biases influencing the risk estimates