. 2023 Jul 21;13(7):1158. doi: 10.3390/biom13071158

Table 2.

Risk of bias assessment for included studies using the OHAT Rob tool.

Reference		Risk-of-Bias Questions or Domains *
Reference		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11
In vitro studies
Kumar R. and Abraham, 2017 [37]	Reviewer 1	++	++			+	+	+	++	+	++	-
Kumar R. and Abraham, 2017 [37]	Reviewer 2	++	+			+	-	+	++	++	++	+
J. Zhang et al., 2017 [38]	Reviewer 1	+	-			+	+	++	++	+	++	--
J. Zhang et al., 2017 [38]	Reviewer 2	++	+			+	+	++	++	+	+	--
Firouzi-Amandi et al., 2018 [40]	Reviewer 1	-	-			+	+	+	+	-	+	--
Firouzi-Amandi et al., 2018 [40]	Reviewer 2	+	+			+	+	+	-	+	-	--
Cherk Yong et al., 2019 [42]	Reviewer 1	-	-			-	-	+	+	-	+	--
Cherk Yong et al., 2019 [42]	Reviewer 2	-	-			-	-	+	+	-	-	--
Ouyang et al., 2019 [43]	Reviewer 1	+	+			+	+	++	+	+	+	-
Ouyang et al., 2019 [43]	Reviewer 2	+	+			+	++	+	+	+	+	-
Pang et al., 2019 [44]	Reviewer 1	+	+			+	++	+	+	+	+	+
Pang et al., 2019 [44]	Reviewer 2	+	+			+	+	+	+	+	+	-
Saha et al., 2020 [46]	Reviewer 1	+	+			+	+	+	+	+	+	+
Saha et al., 2020 [46]	Reviewer 2	+	+			+	+	+	+	-	++	+
Xu et al., 2020 [48]	Reviewer 1	++	+			+	++	+	+	+	+	+
Xu et al., 2020 [48]	Reviewer 2	+	+			+	++	+	+	++	+	+
L. Zhang et al., 2020 [50]	Reviewer 1	+	++			+	+	++	++	+	+	++
L. Zhang et al., 2020 [50]	Reviewer 2	+	++			+	+	+	+	+	+	++
He et al., 2022 [53]	Reviewer 1	+	-			+	+	+	+	+	-	--
He et al., 2022 [53]	Reviewer 2	+	+			+	+	+	+	+	-	--
Li et al., 2022 [54]	Reviewer 1	+	+			+	+	+	+	+	+	-
Li et al., 2022 [54]	Reviewer 2	+	+			+	+	++	+	+	+	-
Mohamed et al., 2022 [55]	Reviewer 1	+	++			++	+	+	+	+	+	+
Mohamed et al., 2022 [55]	Reviewer 2	+	+			++	+	+	+	+	+	+
Rodrigues et al., 2022 [56]	Reviewer 1	+	-			+	-	-	-	-	+	--
Rodrigues et al., 2022 [56]	Reviewer 2	+	+			+	+	+	-	-	-	--
Yang et al., 2022 [58]	Reviewer 1	+	+			+	+	+	+	+	+	+
Yang et al., 2022 [58]	Reviewer 2	+	+			++	+	+	+	+	+	+
In vivo studies
Krishnan et al., 2017 [36]	Reviewer 1	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+
Krishnan et al., 2017 [36]	Reviewer 2	+	+	-	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+
H. Zhang et al., 2017 [39]	Reviewer 1	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+
H. Zhang et al., 2017 [39]	Reviewer 2	-	-	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+
vanden Braber et al., 2018 [41]	Reviewer 1	-	+	+	-	-	+	+	+	+	+	+
vanden Braber et al., 2018 [41]	Reviewer 2	-	+	+	-	-	+	+	+	+	+	+
Bei et al., 2020 [45]	Reviewer 1	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+
Bei et al., 2020 [45]	Reviewer 2	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+
Wang et al., 2020 [47]	Reviewer 1	++	++	+	++	+	++	+	+	+	+	+
Wang et al., 2020 [47]	Reviewer 2	+	++	++	+	+	+	++	+	+	+	+
F. Zhang et al., 2020 [49]	Reviewer 1	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+
F. Zhang et al., 2020 [49]	Reviewer 2	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+
Diez-Echave et al., 2021 [51]	Reviewer 1	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+
Diez-Echave et al., 2021 [51]	Reviewer 2	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+	+
Al-Shalabi et al., 2022 [52]	Reviewer 1	+	++	++	++	+	+	+	+	++	+	+
Al-Shalabi et al., 2022 [52]	Reviewer 2	+	+	++	+	+	+	+	+	++	+	+
Tan et al., 2022 [57]	Reviewer 1	+	+	+	-	+	+	+	+	+	+	+
Tan et al., 2022 [57]	Reviewer 2	+	+	-	-	+	+	+	-	+	+	+

* Potential sources of bias are assessed with a set of 11 questions. 1 Was administered dose or exposure level adequately randomized? 2 Was allocation to study groups adequately concealed? 3 Did selection of study participants result in the appropriate comparison groups? 4 Did study design or analysis account for important confounding and modifying variables? 5 Were experimental conditions identical across study groups? 6 Were research personnel blinded to the study group during the study? 7 Were outcome data complete without attrition or exclusion from analysis? 8 Can we be confident in the exposure characterization? 9 Can we be confident in the outcome assessment (including blinding of assessors)? 10 Were all measured outcomes reported? 11 Were there no other potential threats to internal validity.