Table 3.

The CAMARADES quality items

Study	➀	➁	➂	➃	➄	➅	➆	➇	➈	➉	Quality score
Wang YC et al. 2014	√	√	√		√		√	√		√	7
Bombi Lee et al. 2013	√	√	√	√	√		√	√		√	8
Song XY et al. 2013	√	√	√				√	√		√	6
Quan QK et al. 2013	√	√					√	√	√	√	6
Zhao HH et al. 2012	√	√					√	√	√	√	6
Wang YL et al. 2010	√	√			√			?		√	4
Zhang X et al. 2012	√	√	√		√		√	√	√	√	8
Chu SH et al. 2014	√		√				√	?		√	4
Zhou LP et al. 2011	√	√						√		√	4
Wang XY et al. 2001	√	√	√				√	√		√	6
Wu W et al. 2011	√	√						√		√	4
Zang Y et al. 2010	√	√	√					√		√	5

(1) peer reviewed publication; (2) presence of randomization of subjects into treatment groups; (3) assessment of dose–response relationship; (4) blinded assessment of behavioural outcome; (5) monitoring of physiological parameters such as body temperature; (6) calculation of necessary sample size to achieve sufficient power; (7) statement of compliance with animal welfare regulations; (8) avoidance of anaesthetic agents with marked intrinsic neuroprotective properties (e.g., ketamine); (9) statement of potential conflict of interests; (10) use of a suitable animal model