Table 3.

OHAT (Office of Health Assessment and Translation) tool for Risk of bias and methodological quality assessment.

Vitro-studies	Selection Bias		Performance Bias		Attrition/Exclusion Bias	Detection Bias		Selective Reporting Bias	Other Sources of Bias
Authors, Years	1. Was random allocation present?	2. Was allocation to study groups adequately concealed?	5. Were the experimental conditions identical across study groups?	6. Were the research personnel Blinded to the study group?	7. Were outcome data complete without attrition or exclusion from analysis?	8. Can we be confident in the intervention characterization?	9. Can we be confident in the outcome assessment?	10. Were all measured outcomes reported?	11. Statistical methods were appropriate, or researchers adhered to the study protocol?
Athiban et al, 2012	- NR	- NR	++	- NR	++	+	+	–	–
Leila Bazvand et al, 2013	+	–	++	–	++	++	++	++	++
Karkare et al, 2015	- NR	- NR	++	- NR	+	++	–	++	++
Sahebi S. 2013	++	–	–	- NR	+	+	NR	+	+
Bhardwaj et al, 2012	NR	–	+	- NR	+	+	–	–	+
Abbas Abbaszadegan et al, 2014	++	+	++	+	++	++	–	++	++
Babaji et al, 2016	- NR	- NR	+	- NR	++	++	–	++	+
Ehsani et al, 2013	- NR	- NR	+	- NR	+	+	–	+	+
Ismail et al, 2020	–	+	+	- NR	++	+	–	++	+
Ghasem et al, 2020	- NR	- NR	++	- NR	++	++	+	++	++
Sailaja et al, 2020	- NR	- NR	++	- NR	++	+	–	++	+
Thilla S Vinothkumar et al, 2012	- NR	- NR	++	- NR	++	++	–	++	++
Ramamurthy Varshini et al, 2019	+	- NR	++	- NR	+	++	–	+	+
Valera et al, 2013	- NR	- NR	++	- NR	+	+	–	+	+
Goud et al, 2018	+	- NR	++	- NR	++	++	–	++	+
Vasudeva et al, 2017	- NR	- NR	++	- NR	+	++	–	++	+
M. C. Noushad et al, 2018	- NR	–	++	–	++	+	–	++	+
Eskandarinezhad et al, 2022	++	- NR	++	- NR	++	+	+	++	–

Q#3&Q#4 do not apply for vitro studies.

++ Definitely low risk of bias.

+ Probably low risk of bias.

- Probably high risk of bias.

-- Definitely high risk of bias.

NR = not reported.