Skip to main content
. 2025 Aug 22;29(1):146. doi: 10.1007/s10006-025-01432-5

Table 2.

Methodological quality assessment with the AMSTAR2 tool

Author (year) 1. PICO components 2. A priori design 3. Rationale for study selection 4. Literature search 5. Duplicate Selection 6. Duplicate Abstraction 7. List of excluded studies 8. Description of included studies 9a. RoB in RCTs 9a. RoB in NRSI 10. Funding sources 11. Appropriate MA methods 12. Used RoB in MA 13. Used RoB in interpreting results 14. Discussion of heterogeneity 15. Publication bias 16. Conflict of Interest Overall rating
Xiang (2019) Y N Y N Y Y Y Y Y Includes only RCTs N Y Y Y Y Y Y Moderate
Chen (2017) Y N Y N N Y Y PY Y Includes only RCTs N Y N Y N Y Y Low
He (2017) Y N Y PY N Y Y PY Y Y N Y N N Y Y N Low
Al-Hamed (2017) Y N Y N N Y Y PY Y Includes only RCTs N N Y Y N N N Low
Barona-Dorado (2014) Y N Y PY N N Y N PY Includes only RCTs N NM NM Y N NM N Critical Low
Lopes da Silva (2020) Y PY Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Includes only RCTs N

Y/RCTs

NM/NRSI

Y Y Y N Y High
Aloy-Prósper (2010) Y N Y N N N N N N Includes only RCTs N NM NM N N N N Critical Low
Toledano-Serrabona (2021) Y N Y PY Y Y Y PY Y Includes only RCTs N NM Y Y N N Y Low
 Lee (2016) Y N Y N Y Y Y PY Y Includes only RCTs N

Y/RCTs

NM/NRSI

Y Y Y Y Y Moderate
Barbato (2016) Y PY Y Y Y Y Y PY Y Includes only RCTs Y

Y/RCTs

NM/NRSI

Y Y Y N Y High
Camps-Font (2016) Y PY Y Y Y Y Y PY Y Includes only RCTs N NM Y Y Y Y Y High
Ramos (2022) Y PY Y N Y Y Y PY Y Includes only RCTs N

N/RCTs

NM/NRSI

N N Y N Y Critical Low
Pang (2022) Y PY Y PY Y N Y Y Y Y N N N N Y N Y Critical Low
Soo-Hoong Low (2021) Y PY Y PY Y Y Y Y Y PY N Y Y Y Y Y Y High
Franchini (2019) Y N Y PY Y Y PY Y Y Includes only RCTs N Y Y Y Y Y Y High
Miron (2017) Y N Y N Y Y Y PY N N N NM NM N Y NM Y Moderate
Danylyuk (2019) Y N N PY N N Y PY N N N NM NM N N NM N Critical Low
Del Fabbro (2011) Y N Y Y Y Y Y PY Y Y N NM NM Y Y NM Y Low
Fujioka-Kobayashi (2021) Υ Υ Υ Υ Υ Υ Υ Υ Υ Includes only RCTs N Y/RCT Y Y Y Y Y High
J. Zhu (2020) Y N Y N Y Y N PY Y Includes only RCTs N Y/RCT Y Y Y Y Y Moderate
Junfei Zhu, (2019) Y N Y PY Y Y N PY Y Y N Y/Y Y Y Y N N Moderate
João Vitor dos Santos Canellas, (2020) Y Y Y Y Y Y Y PY Y Includes only RCTs N Y/RCT Y Y Y Y Y High
Del Fabbro (2017) Y N Y PY Y Y Y PY Y Y N Y/N Y Y Y Y Y High
Snopek (2021) Y Y Y Y Y Y Y PY Y Includes only RCTs N Y/RCT Y Y Y Y Y High
Jakobsen (2013) Y N Y N N N N PY N N N NM/NM NM N N NM Y Critical Low
Morjaria (2012) Y PY Y PY Y Y Y PY N N N NM NM Y N N N Critical Low
J. V. dos S. Canellas (2017) Y Y N Y Y N Y Y Y Includes only RCTs N Y/RCT N Y N N Y Low
Domic (2023) Y PY Y PY Y Y Y Y PY PY Y N Y Y N N Y Moderate
Pereira (2024) Y PY N PY Y Y N N PY PY N NM NM Y N NM Y Critical Low
Lu Ye (2024) Y Y N PY Y Y N PY PY Includes only RCTs N N N Y Y Y Y Low
Liang Chen (2023) Y PY N Y Y N N PY PY Includes only RCTs N N N Y N N Y Low
Menager L. (2023) Y PY N N Y Y N N PY Includes only RCTs N NM NM Y N N Y Critical Low
Yongping Yuan (2024) N N N PY Y Y Ν PY PY Includes only RCTs N N Y N N Y Y Low

AMSTAR 2; I: item; Y: yes; N: no; PY: partial yes. Item 1: did the research questions and inclusion criteria for the review include the components of PICO? Item 2: did the report of the review contain an explicit statement that the review methods were established prior to the conduct of the review and did the report justify any significant deviations from the protocol? Item 3: did the review authors explain their selection of the study designs for inclusion in the review? Item 4: did the review authors use a comprehensive literature search strategy? Item 5: did the review authors perform study selection in duplicate? Item 6: did the review authors perform data extraction in duplicate? Item 7: did the review authors provide a list of excluded studies and justify the exclusions? Item 8: did the review authors describe the included studies in adequate detail? Item 9: did the review authors use a satisfactory technique for assessing the risk of bias (RoB) in individual studies that were included in the review? Item 10: did the review authors report on the sources of funding for the studies included in the review? Item 11: if meta-analysis was performed did the review authors use appropriate methods for statistical combination of results? Item 12: if meta-analysis was performed, did the review authors assess the potential impact of RoB in individual studies on the results of the meta-analysis or other evidence synthesis? Item 13: did the review authors account for RoB in individual studies when interpreting/discussing the results of the review? Item 14: did the review authors provide a satisfactory explanation for, and discussion of, any heterogeneity observed in the results of the review? Item 15: if they performed quantitative synthesis, did the review authors carry out an adequate investigation of publication bias (small study bias) and discuss its likely impact on the results of the review? Item 16: did the review authors report any potential sources of conflicts of interest, including any funding they received for conducting the review?