Table 2. NOS for risk of bias assessment in included studies.
Studies | Selection (maximum four stars) |
Comparability (maximum two stars) |
Outcome (maximum three stars) |
Total |
---|---|---|---|---|
Gasser et al. | *** | – | ** | 5 |
Huckaby et al. | *** | ** | *** | 8 |
Liu et al. | ** | ** | * | 5 |
Li et al. | *** | ** | *** | 8 |
Norton et al. | *** | ** | *** | 8 |
Rios et al. | ** | – | * | 3 |
Sabashnikov et al. | ** | ** | ** | 6 |
Suzuki et al. | *** | ** | *** | 8 |
Yousef et al. | *** | ** | *** | 8 |
Conway et al. | *** | – | *** | 6 |
Friedrich et al. | *** | ** | *** | 8 |
Fukui et al. | **** | ** | *** | 9 |
Chen et al. | *** | ** | *** | 8 |
Santamaria et al. | *** | ** | *** | 8 |
Hirata et al. | ** | * | ** | 5 |
Total scores greater or equal to six were considered moderate to good quality. NOS, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.