Table 2.
AMSTAR 2 evaluation results of the included literature
| Study | AMSTAR 2 items | Quality rating | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1a | 2b | 3c | 4d | 5e | 6f | 7 g | 8 h | 9i | 10j | 11 k | 12 l | 13 m | 14n | 15o | 16p | ||
| Dol et al. (2020) | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | PY | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | PY | Critically low |
| Chae and Kim (2021) | Y | N | N | PY | N | N | N | PY | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Critically low |
| Loughnan et al. (2019) | PY | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | N | PY | Y | N | N | N | Y | N | Y | Y | Critically low |
| Nair et al. (2018) | N | Y | Y | Y | N | N | N | PY | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Critically low |
| Roman et al. (2019) | Y | N | N | PY | N | N | N | PY | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Critically low |
| Lau et al. (2017) | Y | Y | Y | PY | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Low |
| Neo et al. (2022) | Y | Y | N | PY | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | Critically low |
| Liu et al. (2022) | Y | Y | N | PY | N | Y | N | PY | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | N | Critically low |
| Lau et al. (2022) | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Moderate |
| Zhao et al. (2021) | PY | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | N | PY | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | N | Y | Critically low |
| Mu et al. (2021) | Y | N | N | PY | N | N | N | PY | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Critically low |
| Lau et al. (2020) | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Low |
Y yes, PY partial yes, N no
aDid the research questions and inclusion criteria for the review include the components of PICO?
bDid the report of the review contain an explicit statement that the review methods were established before the conduct of the review, and did the report justify any significant deviations from the protocol?
cDid the review authors explain their selection of the study designs for inclusion in the review?
dDid the review authors use a comprehensive literature search strategy?
eDid the review authors perform study selection in duplicate?
fDid the review authors perform data extraction in duplicate?
gDid the review authors provide a list of excluded studies and justify the exclusions?
hDid the review authors describe the included studies in adequate detail?
iDid the review authors use a satisfactory technique for assessing the risk of bias (RoB) in individual studies included in the review?
jDid the review authors report on funding sources for the studies included in the review?
kIf meta-analysis was performed, did the review authors use appropriate methods for statistical combination of results?
lIf meta-analysis was performed, did the review authors assess the potential impact of RoB in individual studies on the results of the meta-analysis or other evidence synthesis?
mDid the review authors account for RoB in individual studies when interpreting/discussing the results of the review?
nDid the review authors provide a satisfactory explanation for, and discussion of, any heterogeneity observed in the results of the review?
oIf they performed quantitative synthesis, did the review authors carry out an adequate investigation of publication bias (small study bias) and discuss its likely impact on the review results?
pDid the review authors report any potential sources of conflict of interest, including any funding they received for conducting the review?