Table 2.
Assessment of risk of bias in each study using the QUIN tool
| Criteria number | Criteria | Qi et al. (2003) [35] |
Kuramitsu et al. (2003) [45] |
Miyakawa et al. (2004) [36] |
Giacona et al. (2004) [37] |
Shaik-Dasthagirisaheb et al. (2013) [42] |
Li et al. (2013) [47] |
Shaik-Dasthagirisheb et al. (2016) [43] |
Liang et al. (2016) [46] |
Kim et al. (2018) [48] |
Gupta et al. (2019) [44] |
Yang et al. (2020) [41] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Clearly stated aims/objectives | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 2 | Detailed explanation of sample size calculation | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
| 3 | Detailed explanation of the sampling technique | NA | NA | NA | 2 | 2 | NA | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 4 | Details of the comparison group | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
| 5 | Detailed explanation of the methodology | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 6 | Operator details | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 7 | Randomization | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
| 8 | Method of measurement of outcome | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 9 | Outcome assessor details | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 10 | Blinding | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 11 | Statistical analysis | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| 12 | Presentation of results | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Total score | 55.55% | 44.44% | 50% | 65% | 70% | 61.11% | 40% | 70% | 70% | 70% | 65% | |
| Risk of bias | Medium | High | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium | High | Medium | Medium | Medium | Medium | |