Table 2.
Methodological quality of the included studies
| First author, reference | (1) Define the source of information | (2) List inclusion and exclusion criteria for subjects | (3) Indicate time period used for identifying patients | (4) Subjects were consecutive | (5) Evaluators of subjective components of study were masked to other aspects of the status of the participants | (6) Any assessments undertaken for quality assurance purposes | (7) Explain any patient exclusions from analysis | (8) Describe how confounding was assessed and/or controlled | (9) Explain how missing data were handled in the analysis | (10) Summarize patient response rates and completeness of data collection | (11) The percentage of patients for which incomplete data or follow-up was obtained | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yajima18 | Y | N | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 6 |
| Chujo19 | Y | N | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 6 |
| Hayashi20 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 8 |
| Vos21 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 8 |
| Kobayashi22 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 8 |
| Inaba9 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 8 |
| Meyer23 | Y | N | N | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | 5 |
| Sany24 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 8 |
| Harada25 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 8 |
| Kim26 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 8 |
| Fukami27 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 8 |
| Riveline28 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 8 |
| Lee29 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 8 |
| Kim30 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 8 |
| Mittman31 | Y | N | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 6 |
| Uzu32 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 8 |
| Qayyum33 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | 9 |
| Tsuruta34 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 8 |
| Lo35 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 8 |
| Joy10 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 8 |
| Ichikawa36 | Y | N | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 6 |
| Wang37 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 8 |
| Williams38 | Y | N | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 6 |
| Chen39 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 8 |
N, no; Y, yes.
An item would be scored “0” if it was answered “No” or “Unclear”; an item would be scored “1” if it was answered “Yes.” Article quality was assessed as follows: low quality = 0−3; moderate quality = 4−7; high quality = 8−11.