Table 2.

Methodological quality assessment using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the cohort studies

First author	Arms	Representativeness of exposed cohort	Selection of the non-exposed cohort	Ascertainment of exposure	Demonstration that outcome of interest wars not present at start	Comparability of cohorts on the basis of the design	Assessment of outcome	Was follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur	Adequacy of follow-up of cohort
Lu MD [11]	MWA vs. RFA	*	*	*	*	**	*	*	*
Ohmoto K [14]	MWA vs. RFA	*	*	*	*	**	*	*	*
Zhang L [10]	MWA vs. RFA	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*
Ding J [12]	MWA vs. RFA	*	*	*	*	**	*	*	*
Vogl TJ [9]	MWA vs. RFA	*	*	*	*	**		*	*
Zhang NN [13]	MWA vs. RFA	*	*	*	*	**	*	*	*
Wakui N [20]	PEI vs. RFA	*	*	*	*	**	*	*	*
Morimoto M [18]	PEI vs. RFA	*	*	*	*	**	*	*	*
Luo BM [21]	PEI vs. RFA	*	*	*	*		*	*	*
Seror O [19]	PEI vs. RFA	*		*	*	**	*	*	*
Adam R [31]	CRA vs. RFA	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*
Pearson AS [30]	CRA vs. RFA	*	*	*	*	**	*	*	*
Ei S [33]	CRA vs. RFA	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*
Dunne RM [32]	CRA vs. RFA	*	*	*	*	**	*	*	*
Wong SN [28]	PEI + RFA vs. RFA	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*
Chan AC [36]	HIFU vs. RFA	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*

A study can be awarded a maximum of * for each item

A maximum of ** can be given for Comparability