Table 2.

Risk of bias in in vivo studies selected in the current systematic review based on SYRCLES’ tool

		Selection bias			Performance bias		Detection bias		Attrition bias	Reporting bias	Other
	Study	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10
1	Yamazoe et al., 2014	No	No	No	?	?	No	?	?	?	Yes
2	Ignacio Sancho-Martinez et al., 2016	?	?	?	?	?	?	?	?	?	No
3	Ogawa et al., 2018	?	?	?	?	?	?	?	?	?	No
4	Huang et al., 2019	No	?	?	Yes	?	?	?	?	?	No
5	Liu et al., 2019	?	?	?	?	?	?	?	?	?	No
6	Terada et al., 2019	?	Yes	?	Yes	?	Yes	?	?	?	Yes
7	Ikemoto et al., 2020	No	?	?	?	?	?	?	?	?	No
8	Koga et al., 2020	Yes	Yes	?	?	?	?	?	?	?	Yes
9	Tamura et al., 2020	Yes	Yes	?	Yes	?	?	?	?	?	Yes
10	Haag et al., 2021	Yes	Yes	?	Yes	?	?	?	?	?	Yes
11	Anastasaki et al., 2022	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	?	?	?	?	Yes
12	Susanto et al., 2019	No	?	?	Yes	?	?	?	?	?	No
13	Xue et al., 2021	No	?	?	?	?	?	?	?	?	No
14	Ballabio et al., 2020	?	?	?	?	?	?	?	?	?	No

SYRCLE, Systematic Review Center for Laboratory Animal Experimentation.

Yes = low risk of bias; No = high risk of bias; ? = Unclear bias. (1) Sequence generation, (2) Baseline characteristics, (3) Allocation concealment, (4) Random housing, (5) Blinding, (6) Random outcome assessment, (7) Blinding, (8) Incomplete outcome data, (9) selective outcome reporting, and (10) other sources of bias.