Table 3.

Quality assessment of selected studies based on the guidelines from the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist for cohort studies [40].

Reference	Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Checklist													Score	Classification
	1	2	4	5a	5b	6a	6b	7	8	9	10	11	12
de Oliveira et al., 2012 [51]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	17	Moderate
Choi et al., 2014 [74]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	22	High
Eilertsen et al., 2014 [69]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	22	High
Pértega-Gomes et al., 2014 [57]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	17	Moderate
Pinheiro et al., 2014 [45]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	19	Moderate
Polanski et al., 2014 [35]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	21	High
Zhao et al., 2014 [30]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	12	Low
Afonso et al., 2015 [27]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	21	High
Andersen et al., 2015 [56]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	19	Moderate
Kim et al., 2015 [60]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	22	High
Afonso et al., 2016 [76]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	22	High
Martins et al., 2016 [59]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	23	High
Pinheiro et al., 2016 [41]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	21	High
Pinheiro et al., 2016 [50]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	21	High
Sousa-Simões et al., 2016 [42]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	19	Moderate
Giatromanolaki et al., 2017 [70]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	18	Moderate
Johnson et al., 2017 [71]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	21	High
Latif et al., 2017 [43]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	23	High
Mikkilineni et al., 2017 [53]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	15	Moderate
Sáenz-de-Santa-María et al., 2017 [54]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	18	Moderate
Wang et al., 2017 [67]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	14	Moderate
Cao et al., 2018 [61]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	20	Moderate
Li et al., 2018 [72]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	21	High
Roseweir et al., 2018 [58]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	21	High
Silva et al., 2018 [44]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	21	High
Zhang et al., 2018 [75]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	22	High
Afonso et al., 2019 [65]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	21	High
Chen et al., 2019 [62]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	22	High
Sukeda et al., 2019 [47]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	18	Moderate
Zheng et al., 2019 [63]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	20	Moderate
Dell’Anno et al., 2020 [52]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	12	Low
Bonatelli et al., 2021 [55]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	22	High
Eskuri et al., 2021 [66]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	22	High
Leu et al., 2021 [46]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	21	High
Tong et al., 2021 [68]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	21	High
Yokoo et al., 2021 [49]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	19	Moderate
Hiltunen et al., 2022 [48]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	18	Moderate
Sun et al., 2022 [73]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	24	High
Zhao et al., 2022 [64]	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	●	20	Moderate

Score of individual parameters: ● 0 points; ● 1 point; ● 2 points. Final classification: ■ low, ≤13 points; ■ moderate, 14–20 points; ■ high, >21 points.