Table 1. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Checklist.
From: Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71<br>For more information, visit: http://www.prisma-statement.org/
| Section and Topic C | Item<br># | Checklist item | Location where<br>item is reported |
|---|---|---|---|
| TITLE | |||
| Title | 1 | Identify the report as a systematic review. | Page 1 |
| ABSTRACT | |||
| Abstract | 2 | See the PRISMA 2020 for Abstracts checklist. | Page 2 |
| INTRODUCTION | |||
| Rationale | 3 | Describe the rationale for the review in the context of existing knowledge. | Page 4–5 |
| Objectives | 4 | Provide an explicit statement of the objective(s) or question(s) the review addresses. | Page 5 |
| METHODS | |||
| Eligibility criteria | 5 | Specify the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the review and how studies were<br>grouped for the syntheses. | Page 5–6 |
| Information sources | 6 | Specify all databases, registers, websites, organizations, reference lists, and other sources<br>searched or consulted to identify studies. Specify the date when each source was last<br>searched or consulted. | Page 5–6 |
| Search strategy | 7 | Present the full search strategies for all databases, registers, and websites, including<br>any filters and limits used. | Page 5–6 |
| Selection process | 8 | Specify the methods used to decide whether a study met the inclusion criteria of the <br>review, including how many reviewers screened each record and each report retrieved, <br>whether they worked independently, and if applicable, details of <br>automation tools used in the process. | Page 5–6 |
| Data collection<br>process | 9 | Specify the methods used to collect data from reports, including how many reviewers <br>collected data from each report, whether they worked independently, any processes for <br>obtaining or confirming data from study investigators, and if applicable, details of <br>automation tools used in the process. | Page 5–6 |
| Data items | 10a | List and define all outcomes for which data were sought. Specify whether all results that<br>were compatible with each outcome domain in each study were sought (e.g. for all meas-<br>ures,time points, analyses), and if not, the methods used to decide which results to collect. | Page 6 |
| 10b | List and define all other variables for which data were sought (e.g. participant and<br>intervention characteristics, funding sources). Describe any assumptions made about<br>any missing or unclear information. | Page 6 | |
| Study risk of bias<br>assessment | 11 | Specify the methods used to assess risk of bias in the included studies, including details<br>of the tool(s) used, how many reviewers assessed each study and whether they worked<br>independently, and if applicable, details of automation tools used in the process. | Page 6 |
| Effect measures | 12 | Specify for each outcome the effect measure(s) (e.g. risk ratio, mean difference)<br>đused in the synthesis or presentation of results. | Page 6 |
| Synthesis methods | 13a | Describe the processes used to decide which studies were eligible for each synthesis (e.g.<br>tabulating the study intervention characteristics and comparing against the planned groups<br>for each synthesis (item #5)). | Page 6 |
| 13b | Describe any methods required to prepare the data for presentation or synthesis, such as<br>handling missing summary statistics, or data conversions. | Page 6 | |
| 13c | Describe any methods used to tabulate or visually display results of individual studies and<br>syntheses. | Page 6 | |
| 13d | Describe any methods used to synthesize results and provide a rationale for the choice(s).<br>If meta-analysis was performed, describe the model(s), method(s) to identify the presence<br>and extent of statistical heterogeneity, and software package(s) used. | Page 6 | |
| 13e | Describe any methods used to explore possible causes of heterogeneity among study results<br>(e.g. subgroup analysis, meta-regression). | Page 6 | |
| 13f | Describe any sensitivity analyses conducted to assess robustness of the synthesized results. | N/A | |
| Reporting bias<br>assessment | 14 | Describe any methods used to assess risk of bias due to missing results in a synthesis<br>(arising from reporting biases). | Page 6 |
| Certainty assessment | 15 | Describe any methods used to assess certainty (or confidence) in the body of evidence<br>for an outcome. | Page 6 |
| RESULTS | |||
| Study selection | 16a | Describe the results of the search and selection process, from the number of records identified<br>in the search to the number of studies included in the review, ideally using a flow diagram. | Page 7;<br>Table 1 |
| 16b | Cite studies that might appear to meet the inclusion criteria, but which were excluded,<br>and explain why they were excluded. | Page 7–9 | |
| Study characteristics | 17 | Cite each included study and present its characteristics. | Page 7–8 |
| Risk of bias in studies | 18 | Present assessments of risk of bias for each included study. | Figure 2 |
| Results of individual<br>studies | 19 | For all outcomes, present, for each study: (a) summary statistics for each group (whereappropriate) and (b) an effect estimate and its precision (e.g. confidence/credible interval),ideally using structured tables or plots. | Figure 1;<br>Page 10 |
| Results of syntheses | 20a | For each synthesis, briefly summarise the characteristics and risk of bias among<br>contributing studies. | Page 7-8 |
| 20b | Present results of all statistical syntheses conducted. If meta-analysis was done, present for<br>each the summary estimate and its precision (e.g. confidence/credible interval) and measures<br>of statistical heterogeneity. If comparing groups, describe the direction of the effect. | Page 7–10;<br>Figure 1 | |
| 20c | Present results of all investigations of possible causes of heterogeneity among study results. | Page 8 | |
| 20d | Present results of all sensitivity analyses conducted to assess the robustness of the<br>synthesized results. | N/A | |
| Reporting biases | 21 | Present assessments of risk of bias due to missing results (arising from reporting biases) for<br>each synthesis assessed. | Figure 2 |
| Certainty of evidence | 22 | Present assessments of certainty (or confidence) in the body of evidence for each outcome<br>assessed. | N/A |
| DISCUSSION | |||
| 23a | Provide a general interpretation of the results in the context of other evidence. | Page 10–12 | |
| 23b | Discuss any limitations of the evidence included in the review. | Page 12 | |
| 23c | Discuss any limitations of the review processes used. | Page 12 | |
| 23d | Discuss implications of the results for practice, policy, and future research. | Page 11–12 | |
| OTHER INFORMATION | |||
| Registration and<br>protocol | 24a | Provide registration information for the review, including register name and<br>registration number, or state that the review was not registered. | N/A |
| 24b | Indicate where the review protocol can be accessed, or state that a protocol<br>was not prepared. | N/A | |
| 24c | Describe and explain any amendments to information provided at registration<br>or in the protocol. | N/A | |
| Support | 25 | Describe sources of financial or non-financial support for the review, and the role of the fun-<br>dersor sponsors in the review. | Page 12 |
| Competing interests | 26 | Declare any competing interests of review authors. | Page 12 |
| Availability of data,<br>code and other<br>materials | 27 | Report which of the following are publicly available and where they can be found:<br>template data collection forms; data extracted from included studies; data used for all analy-<br>ses;analytic code; any other materials used in the review. | Upon request to corr. author |