Table 2.

Results of assess the methodological quality of meta-analysis.

Study	Q 1	Q2	Q3	Q4	Q5	Q6	Q7	Q8	Q9	Q10	Q11	Q12	Q13	Q14	Q15	Q16	Quality assessment
Casariego et al. 2013	No	Partial Yes	Yes	Partial Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	No	Yes	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	Moderate
Abbasnezhad et al. 2020	No	Partial Yes	Yes	Partial Yes	Yes	Yes	Partial Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	High
Abolfathi et al. 2020	Yes	Yes	Yes	Partial Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	High
Asadi et al. 2020	No	Yes	Yes	Partial Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	High
Asbaghi et al. 2020	Yes	Yes	Yes	Partial Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	High
Askarpour et al. 2019	Yes	Partial Yes	Yes	Partial Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	High
Chen et al. 2014	No	Yes	Yes	Partial Yes	Yes	Yes	Partial Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Moderate
Choi et al. 2020	No	Yes	Yes	Partial Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Partial Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Moderate
Huang et al. 2013	No	Yes	Yes	Partial Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Moderate
Liao et al. 2021	No	Yes	Yes	Partial Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	High
Yang et al. 2014	No	Yes	Yes	Partial Yes	Yes	Yes	Partial Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	No	Moderate
Gholipur et al.2018	Yes	Yes	Yes	Partial Yes	Yes	Yes	Partial Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	Moderate
Fathizadeh et al. 2019	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	Critically low