“…A score of zero was assigned if the paper contained no information, one if there was a moderate amount, and a score of two indicated that the question was fully addressed (Rushbrooke, Murray & Townsend, 2014). A total of 13 studies achieved a score of 17 or greater, indicating good quality information (Benotsch, Zimmerman, Cathers & McNulty, 2016;Boza & Perry, 2014;de Bolger, Jones, Dunstan & Lykins, 2014;Horvath, Iantaffi, Romine & Bockting, 2014;Kaplan et al, 2015;Keuroghlian, Reisner, White & Weiss, 2015;Marshall et al, 2016;Nuttbrock et al, 2015;Reback, Shoptaw & Downing, 2012;Reisner et al, 2010;Rotondi et al, 2011;Scheim, Bauer & Shokoohi, 2017;Taylor, Bimbi, Joseph, Margolis & Parsons, 2011). A score of between 14 and 16 was given to 6 studies that showed that there were information gaps related to clarity of the aims, data collection methods, research relationships considered and ethics statements (Benotsch, Zimmerman, Cathers & McNulty, 2013;Dadasovich et al, 2017 ;Reisner et al 2010;Reisner, White, Mayer & Mimiaga, 2014;Testa et al, 2012;Wilson, Arayasirikul & Johnson, 2013).…”