Table 5.
Selection | Comparability | Outcome | Total | Rating | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Author, year [Reference] | Representativeness of the exposed cohort | Selection of the non-exposed cohort | Ascertainment of exposure | Demonstration that outcome of interest was not present at start of study | Comparability of cohorts on basis of design or analysis | Assessment of outcome | Was follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur | Adequacy of follow-up of cohorts | Number of stars (max. 9) | 7–9=high; 4–6=moderate; 1–3=low |
Africa | ||||||||||
Abaasa, 2008 [20] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 7 | High | |
Alemu, 2010 [23] | * | * | * | * | * | * | 6 | Moderate | ||
Bastard, 2011 [26] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 8 | High |
Biadgilign, 2012 [27] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
Bisson, 2008 [29] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 8 | High |
Boyles, 2011 [30] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
Brinkhof, 2009 [32] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 7 | High | |
Chalamilla, 2012 [33] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | 8 | High | |
Chen, 2008 [34] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | 8 | High | |
Chi, 2009 [35] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | 8 | High | |
Chi, 2010 [36] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
Chu, 2010 [37] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 8 | High |
Cornell, 2012 [39] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
De Beaudrap, 2008 [41] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 7 | High | |
De Luca, 2012 [42] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
Desilva, 2009 [44] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
Fatti, 2010 [47] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 8 | High |
Ford, 2010 [48] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 8 | High |
Geng, 2010a [51] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 8 | High |
Greig, 2012 [53] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
Hawkins, 2011 [54] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | 8 | High | |
Hermans, 2012 [55] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 8 | High |
Hoffman, 2011 [57] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | 8 | High | |
Johannessen, 2008 [58] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 8 | High |
Kassa, 2012 [60] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
Kouanda, 2012 [63] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
MacPherson, 2009 [65] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
Mageda, 2012 [66] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | 8 | High | |
Maman, 2012b [68] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
Maman, 2012c [69] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | 8 | High | |
Mutevedzi, 2011 [78] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
Negin, 2011 [80] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 7 | High | |
Odafe, 2012 [82] | * | * | * | * | * | * | 6 | Moderate | ||
Ojikutu, 2008 [83] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
Palombi, 2009 [84] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
Peterson, 2011 [87] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 8 | High |
Poka-Mayap, 2013 [88] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | 8 | High | |
Russell, 2010 [90] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 8 | High |
Sieleunou, 2009 [92] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 8 | High |
Somi, 2012 [94] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | 8 | High | |
Toure, 2008 [98] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
Wandeler, 2012 [100] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 7 | High | |
Wubshet, 2012 [102] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 7 | High | |
Central Europe/East Europe | ||||||||||
Tsertsvadze, 2011 [14] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
Latin America | ||||||||||
Wolff, 2010 [104] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
Asia | ||||||||||
Alvarez-Uria, 2013 [105] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | 8 | High | |
Argemi, 2012 [106] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 7 | High | |
Bastard, 2013 [107] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 8 | High |
Chen, 2013 [109] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
Fregonese, 2012 [111] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
Rai, 2013 [114] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | * | 9 | High |
Tran, 2013, Vietnam [118] | * | * | * | * | ** | * | * | 8 | High | |
Van Griensven, 2011 [119] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 8 | High |
Zhang, 2009 [121] | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | 8 | High |
*The study adequately met the criteria; 0–3 stars=low-quality rating, 4–6 moderate quality rating and 7–9 high-quality rating.