Table 2.

Deviation from ROBINS-I domains

Review	ROBINS-I domains							Domain modification	Additional domains
	D1	D2	D3	D4	D5	D6	D7
Park 2022	🗶	🗶	🗶	✓	✓	✓	✓
Saunders 2022	✓	✓	✓	🗶	✓	✓	✓
Thielemann 2022	🗶	🗶	🗶	✓	✓	✓	✓
Houttu 2022	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	🗶
Wong 2022	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	🗶	🗶
Lin 2022	✓	✓	X	M	M	M	M	D4: ‘Bias due to knowledge of allocated interventions by participants and personnel’; D6: ‘Detection bias’; D5: ‘Attrition bias’; D7: ‘Reporting bias’
Scuteri 2022	M	🗶	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	Did not use D1 or D2 but used a domain ‘Baseline differences’
Sousa 2022	✓	M	M	M	M	M	M	Described as a ‘simplified version’, D2/D5: ‘Selection bias’, D3/D6: ‘Information bias’ (relating to recall and detection bias separately), D7: ‘Reporting bias’.
Li 2022	✓	✓	M	M	✓	✓	✓	Did not use D3 or D4 but added a domain ‘Bias from the interventions’; further details not provided.
Psaltis 2022	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	M	✓	D6: ‘Blinding of outcome assessment’	Added ‘Other bias’
Hensums 2022	🗶	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	🗶
Essibayi 2022	✓	✓	✓	🗶	✓	🗶	✓		Added ‘Correlation with clinical practice’
El-Andari 2022	M	M	🗶	🗶	M	M	🗶	D1: ‘Confounding variables’, D2: ‘Group selection’, D5: ‘Missing data’, D6: ‘Classification of outcomes’	Added domains: ‘Recruitment strategy’, ‘Inclusion and exclusion criteria’, ‘Sample size’, ‘Matching’, Statistical methods’, ‘Missing important outcomes’, ‘Follow-up time’ and ‘Incomplete follow-up’
Burns 2022	✓	M	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	D2 was divided into two domains, ‘Sample selection’ and ‘Comparability of the groups’.
Ostapenko 2022	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓		‘Other source of bias’ (rated as ‘n/a’ for every study)

Note: ‘X’: domain omitted; ✓: domain applied; ‘M’: domain modified.