“…In short, there are major concerns in relation to the quality of the primary evidence that informed the findings of even the medium-and high-confidence meta-studies we include in our review. Hence, it pays to be cautious about how much one can trust the overall findings presented in the systematic review evidence, as one simply To conclude this section, we should note that a wide range of quality assessment tools were used in the 11 included studies, such as a customised risk of bias tool adapted from the Cochrane Handbook (see Higgins and Green, 2011) and EPPI-Centre guidelines (e.g., Gough, 2007) Ahmed, 2000 Ahmed, 2005Alam, 2012Amin, 1995Amin, 2001Augsburg, 2006Brannen, 2010Chemin, 2008Copestake, 2002Deininger, 2009Deininger, 2013 De La Cruz, Desai, 2011Diagne, 2001Dunn, 2001Erulkar,2005 Husain, 2010 Islam, 2011Karlan, 2010Khandker, 2005Kondo, 2008Lakwo, 2006McKernan, 2002Montgomery, 2005Morduch, 1998Nanda, 1999Nanor, 2008Odek, 2009PiƩ, 1999Rahman, 2010Sharif, 2004Sherman, 2010…”