Table 2.
Quality appraisal of included quantitative studies
| Quality assessment quantitative studies | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Studies | Question | 2. Study design |
3. Selection |
4. Subject characteristics |
5. Random allocation |
6. Blinding investigator |
7. Blinding subjects |
8. Outcome |
9. Sample size |
10. Analytic methods |
11. Estimate of variance |
12. Confounding |
13. Results |
14. Conclusion |
Summary score |
| Claure, N. et al. (2001) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | n/a | 1 | n/a | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 14/24 = 0.58 |
| Claure, N. et al. (2009) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | n/a | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 16/26 = 0.62 |
| Claure, N. et al. (2011) | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 22/28 = 0.79 |
| Clucas, L. et al. (2007) | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 18/28 = 0.64 |
| Hagadorn, J.I. et al. 2006) | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 16/28 = 0.57 |
| Laptook, A.R. et al. (2006) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 15/28 = 0.54 |
| Mills, B.A. et al. (2010) | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 17/28 = 0.61 |
| Sink, D.W. et al. (2011) | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | n/a | 1 | n/a | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 11/24 = 0.46 |
| Urschitz, M.S. et al. (2004) | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 22/28 = 0.79 |
| Van der Eijk, A.C. et al. (2012) | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 14/28 = 0.5 |
| Zapata, J. et al. (2014) | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 22/28 = 0.79 |
| Lim, K. et al. (2014) | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | n/a | n/a | n/a | 2 | n/a | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 20/20 = 1 |
| Arawiran, J. et al. (2014) | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | n/a | n/a | n/a | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 18/22 = 0.82 |
| Hallenberger, A. et al. (2014) | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 21/28 = 0.75 |
2 = yes; 1 = partial; 0 = no; n/a = not applicable