Table 3.
Risk-of-bias judgements of non-randomized studies of interventions via ROBINS-I.
| * Domains ROBINS-I | Overall Judgment ROBINS-I ** |
|||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Study | Confounding Bias | Participant Selection Bias | Classification of Intervention Bias | Bias Due to Intervention Deviations | Incomplete Data Bias | Outcome Measurement Bias | Selective Outcome Reporting Bias | |
| Sheets et al. 2003 [30] | Moderate | Serious | Low | Low | Low | Low | Moderate | Serious |
| Garcia-Hernández et al. 2006 [32] | Moderate | Serious | Low | Serious | Low | Low | Low | Serious |
| Roman et al. 2007 [34] | Moderate | Serious | Low | Low | Moderate | Low | Low | Serious |
| Trimble et al. 2009 [35] | Moderate | Serious | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Serious |
| Brun et al. 2011 [36] | Moderate | Serious | Low | Low | Moderate | Low | Low | Serious |
| Solares et al. 2011 [37] | Moderate | Serious | Low | Low | Low | Low | Low | Serious |
| Kawana t al. 2014 [39] | Moderate | Serious | Low | Low | Low | Moderate | Moderate | Serious |
| Kim et al. 2014 [40] | Moderate | Serious | Low | Low | Moderate | Low | Low | Serious |
| Greenfield et al. 2015 [41] | Moderate | Serious | Low | Low | Moderate | Low | Moderate | Serious |
| Alvarez et al. 2016 [43] | Moderate | Moderate | Low | Low | Moderate | Low | Moderate | Moderate |
| Coleman et al. 2016 [44] | Moderate | Serious | Low | Low | Moderate | Low | Moderate | Serious |
Acronyms: * ROBINS-I, Risk of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Intervention [41]. ** The global judgement of ROBINS-I is systematized and attributed as follows: Low risk of bias, in which the study is comparable to a well-designed randomized trial (the study is considered as having a low risk of bias for all domains). Moderate risk of bias: the study is consistent with a non-randomized study design, but cannot be considered comparable to a well-designed randomized study (in this case, the study is considered as having a low or moderate risk of bias for all domains). Serious risk of bias: the study has some important problems (the study is considered as having a low or moderate risk of bias for most domains, but presents a serious risk of bias in at least one of the domains). Critical risk of bias: the study is too problematic to provide any evidence (the study is considered as having a critical risk of bias in at least one domain). No information: when no information is available to provide grounds to any judgment of the risk of bias (missing information on one or more domains) [41]. Two reviewers gave identical assessments in each domain in an independent manner.