Skip to main content
. 2023 Oct 6;34(3):952–973. doi: 10.1007/s11065-023-09622-2

Table 5.

Quality indicators across reviewed studies

Method for selecting sample Methods to control cofounding Statistical methods Methods for measuring outcomes
Sample size Identification of cofounders Appropiate analyses Missing data Outcome measures Objective assessment
CM-I adult population
  Pearce et al. (2006)  ↔ 
  Kumar et al. (2011)  ↔   ↔   ↔ 
  Del Casale et al. (2012)  ↔ 
  Mahgoub et al. (2012)  ↔ 
  Allen et al. (2014)  ↔   ↔   ↔ 
  Klein et al. (2014)  ↔   ↔ 
  Allen et al. (2018)  ↔   ↔   ↔ 
  Houston et al. (2018)  ↔   ↔ 
  García et al. (2018b)  ↔   ↔ 
  Besteiro and Torres (2018)  ↔   ↔ 
  Lázaro et al. (2018)  ↔ 
  García et al. (2018a)
  Lacy et al. (2019)  ↔   ↔   ↔   ↔ 
  Houston et al. (2019)  ↔   ↔ 
  García et al. (2020b)  ↔   ↔ 
  García et al. (2020a)  ↔   ↔ 
  Almotairi et al. (2020)  ↔   ↔ 
  Houston et al. (2020)  ↔   ↔ 
  Houston et al. (2021)  ↔   ↔ 
  Seaman et al. (2021)  ↔   ↔ 
  Yilmaz et al. (2022)  ↔   ↔   ↔ 
CM-I pediatric population
  Gabrielli et al. (1998)  ↔ 
  Grosso et al. (2001)  ↔ 
  Haapanen (2007)  ↔ 
  Novegno et al. (2008)  ↔ 
  Riva et al. (2011)  ↔ 
  Lacy et al. (2016)  ↔   ↔   ↔ 
  Sari and Ozum (2021)  ↔   ↔ 

Quality indicators have been selected following the adapted version of modified Newcastle–Ottawa scale (Bawor et al., 2014)

High risk of bias: ; Moderate risk of bias: ↔ ; Low risk of bias: