Skip to main content
. 2025 Aug 26;25:888. doi: 10.1186/s12884-025-08016-x

Table 1.

Quality assessment for eligible studies

Author, Year Representativeness of the Exposed Cohort Selection of the Non-Exposed Cohort Ascertainment of Exposure Outcome of Interest Was Not Present at Start of Study Comparability of Cohorts on the Basis of the Design or Analysis Assessment of Outcome Follow-up Long Enough for Outcomes to Occur Adequacy of Follow-up of Cohorts Total Score
Selection Domain Comparability Domain Outcome/Exposure Domain Quality
Bayraktar, 2020 [30] * * * * ** * * * 4 2 3 Good
Bhat, 2012 [31] * * no star * ** * * * 3 2 2 Good
Bienstock, 2008 [27] no star * * * no star * * * 3 0 3 Poor
Budak, 2018 [32] * * * * ** * * * 4 2 3 Good
Calfee, 1999 [33] * * no star * ** * * * 3 2 3 Good
Delibas, 2018 [34] * * * * ** * * * 4 2 3 Good
Ding, 2023 [35] * * * * ** * * * 4 2 3 Good
Duhl, 2000 [36] * * * * * * * * 4 1 3 Good
Feinberg, 2005 [37] * * * * ** * * * 4 2 3 Good
Kerenyi, 2009 [28] * * * * no star * * no star 4 0 2 Poor
Kwon, 2015 [23] no star no star no star * * no star * * 1 1 2 Poor
Kwon, 2018 [38] * * * * ** * * * 4 2 3 Good
Lurie, 1998 ± [39] no star * no star * * * * * 2 1 3 Fair
Ma, 1998 [40] * * * * ** * * * 4 2 3 Good
Melamed, 2013 [41] * * * no star ** no star * * 3 2 2 Fair
Nayak, 2019 [42] * * * * * * * no star 4 1 2 Good
Oawada, 2019 [43] * * * * ** * * * 4 2 3 Good
Ong, 2008 [44] no star * * * * * * * 3 1 3 Good
Pugh, 2009 [45] * * no star * * * * * 3 1 3 Good
Raviv, 2021 [46] * * * * * * * no star 4 1 2 Good
Rehman, 2022 [47] * * * * * * * * 4 1 3 Good
Reicher, 2021 [48] * * * * * * * * 4 1 3 Good
Rottenstreich, 2017 ± [49] no star * * * * * * * 3 1 3 Good
Scholl, 2021 [29] no star * * * no star * * * 3 0 3 Poor
Shinohara, 2015 [50] * * * * * * * no star 4 1 2 Good
Shinohara, 2016 [51] * * * * * * * no star 4 1 2 Good
Stivers, 2020 [26] * * * * * * * * 4 1 3 Good
Tanacan, 2020 [52] * * * * * * * * 4 1 3 Good
TopÇu, 2016 [53] * no star * * * * * no star 3 1 2 Good
Vadakekut, 2010 [54] * * * * * * * * 4 1 3 Good
Vemareddy, 2009 [25] * * * * ** * * * 4 2 3 Good
Yoles, 2021 [24] * * no star * * no star * * 3 1 2 Good
Yuen, 2019 [55] * no star * * * * * no star 3 1 2 Good
Weissman, 2005 [56] * * * * * * * * 4 1 3 Good

* >star symbol > fulfilment of eligibility criteria

± symbol > disagreement between reviewers, resolved by the senior author