Table 2.

Characteristics of studies included in this meta-analysis.

First author's name	Year of publication	Number of patients FNAC/FNNAC	Number of nodules FNAC/FNNAC	Histopathological diagnosis FNAC/FNNAC	Study design	Needle gauge	Mair et al. scoring system [22]	Patient's age and gender
de Carvalho [10]	2009	260/260	520/520	58/58	Prospective	23	Yes	238 females, 22 males, and age of 43.2 ± 12.6
Schoedel [21]	2008	122/122	180/180	23/23	Prospective	25	No	The ratio of female to male was about 6 : 1, with average age of 57.3
Raghuveer [20]	2002	68/68	68/68	36/36	Prospective	23 or 24	Yes	—
McElvanna [19]	2009	65/65	65/65	65/65	Retrospective	23	No	58 females, 7 males, and average age of 49
Tauro [15]	2012	50/50	50/50	38/38	Prospective	23	No	47 females, 3 males, and age of 39.16 ± 11.47
Maurya [11]	2010	50/50	50/50	—	Prospective	23	Yes	—
Kamal [12]	2002	200/200	200/200	—	Prospective	23 or 24	Yes	173 females, 27 males
Mahajan and Sharma [8]	2010	50/50	50/50	—	Prospective	—	Yes	—
Pinki [13]	2015	100/100	100/100	—	Prospective	22	Yes	—
Ibrahim [23]	2012	50/50	50/50	—	Prospective	25	Yes	—
Kashi [24]	2011	302/302	302/302	—	Prospective	25	Yes	289 females, 13 males, and age of 43.83 ± 12.9
Chowhan [25]	2014	200/200	200/200	—	Prospective	24	Yes	26 males, 174 females
Torabizadeh [14]	2008	200/200	200/200	—	Prospective	/	Yes	189 females, 11 males, and age of 43.36 ± 12.3
Kaur [26]	2014	50/50	50/50	—	Prospective	23	Yes	—
Torres [27]	2003	61/61	122/122	—	Prospective	22	Yes	61 females (100%), age of 49.2 ± 15.3
Ghosh [28]	2000	14/14	14/14	—	Prospective	23–25	Yes	—

FNAC: fine needle aspiration cytology, FNNAC: fine needle nonaspiration cytology, and —: not available.