Assessment of included studies
RCT (RoB2) | D1 | D2 | D3 | D4 | D5 | RoB | ||||||
Chen et al. [17] (2006) | Some concerns | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | ||||||
Huang et al. [18] (2010) | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | ||||||
Retrospective (NOS) | Selection | Comparability | Exposure | Total |
Interpretation | |||||||
Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Q5 | Q6 | Q7 | Q8 | |||||
Guglielmi et al. [35] (2008) | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 8 | High quality | ||
Hiraoka et al. [34] (2008) | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 8 | High quality | ||
Ueno et al. [36] (2009) | - | - | - | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 5 | Low quality | ||
Yun et al. [37] (2011) | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 8 | High quality | ||
Nishikawa et al. [38] (2011) | ★ | - | - | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 6 | High quality | ||
Wong et al. [39] (2013) | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 8 | High quality | ||
Desiderio et al. [40] (2013) | ★ | ★ | - | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 7 | High quality | ||
Pompili et al. [19] (2013) | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 9 | High quality | ||
Imai et al. [41] (2013) | ★ | ★ | - | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 6 | High quality | ||
Kim et al. [42] (2014) | ★ | ★ | - | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 7 | High quality | ||
Yang et al. [20] (2014) | ★ | ★ | - | ★ | ★★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 8 | High quality | ||
Shi et al. [43] (2014) | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 8 | High quality | ||
Kang et al. [21] (2015) | ★ | - | ★ | ★ | ★★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 8 | High quality | ||
Vitali et al. [44] (2016) | ★ | - | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 7 | High quality | ||
Kim et al. [22] (2016) | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 9 | High quality | ||
Lee et al. [23] (2018) | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 9 | High quality | ||
Cha et al. [45] (2020) | ★ | - | - | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 6 | High quality | ||
Sun et al. [24] (2020) | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 9 | High quality | ||
Suh et al. [25] (2021) | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 9 | High quality | ||
An et al. [26] (2021) | ★ | - | - | ★ | ★★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 7 | High quality | ||
Lee et al. [29] (2022) | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 9 | High quality | ||
Zhang et al. [28] (2022) | ★ | - | - | ★ | ★★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 7 | High quality | ||
Ko et al. [27] (2022) | ★ | - | - | ★ | ★★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 7 | High quality | ||
Feng et al. [30] (2022) | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 9 | High quality | ||
Kang et al. [46] (2023) | - | - | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 6 | High quality | ||
Wu et al. [31] (2023) | ★ | - | - | ★ | ★★ | - | ★ | ★ | 6 | High quality | ||
Wang et al. [32] (2023) | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 9 | High quality | ||
Liu et al. [33] (2023) | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | 9 | High quality |
D1, Bias arising from the randomisation process; D2, Bias due to deviations from intended interventions; D3, Bias due to missing outcome data; D4, Bias in measurement of the outcome; D5, Bias in selection of the reported result; Q1, Adequate definition of case; Q2, Representativeness of cases; Q3, Selection of control; Q4, Definition of control; Q5, Study controls for important factor or additional factor; Q6, Ascertainment of exposure; Q7, Same method of ascertainment for cases and controls; Q8, Non-response rate.
RCT, randomized controlled trial; RoB2, risk of bias 2; NOS, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.