Table 1.

Studies classification according to score system.

Investigators, Year Published	Research Design		Methodology		Novelty	Final Score	Classification
	Subjects Number	Studies Characteristics	Analysis Methods	Statistical Support
Nieman et al., 2015 [5]	2	2	3	2	2	11	Excellent
Jacobs et al., 2014 [6]	2	2	3	2	2	11	Excellent
Nieman et al., 2014 [7]	2	2	3	1	2	10	Excellent
Nieman et al., 2017 [8]	2	1	3	2	2	10	Excellent
Davison et al., 2018 [9]	2	2	3	1	1	9	Excellent
Hodgson et al., 2012 [10]	0	2	3	2	2	9	Excellent
Karl et al., 2017 [11]	0	1	3	2	2	8	Good
Lehman et al., 2010 [12]	0	1	3	2	2	8	Good
Lewis et al., 2010 [13]	2	1	3	0	2	8	Good
Nieman et al., 2013 [14]	0	2	3	1	2	8	Good
Al-Khelaifi et al., 2018 [15]	2	0	3	2	1	8	Good
Knab at al., 2013 [16]	0	2	1	2	2	7	Good
Manaf et al., 2018 [17]	0	1	3	2	1	7	Good
Messier et al., 2017 [18]	2	1	1	2	1	7	Good
Nieman et al., 2013 [19]	0	1	3	1	2	7	Good
Nieman et al., 2014 [20]	0	1	3	1	2	7	Good
Ra et al., 2014 [21]	2	1	1	2	1	7	Good
Stander et al., 2018 [22]	2	1	1	2	1	7	Good
Danaher et al., 2015 [23]	0	1	1	2	2	6	Good
Howe et al., 2018 [24]	0	0	3	2	1	6	Good
Neal et al., 2013 [25]	0	1	1	2	2	6	Good
Peake et al., 2014 [26]	0	2	1	1	2	6	Good
Pechlivanis et al., 2013 [27]	0	1	1	2	2	6	Good
Zafeiridis et al., 2016 [28]	0	1	1	2	2	6	Good
Muhsen Ali et al., 2016 [29]	0	0	3	2	0	5	Fair
Castro et al., 2019 [30]	2	1	1	1	0	5	Fair
Enea et al., 2010 [31]	0	1	1	2	1	5	Fair
Andersson Hall et al., 2015 [32]	0	1	1	2	1	5	Fair
Pechlivanis et al., 2010 [33]	0	1	1	2	1	5	Fair
Wang et al., 2015 [34]	0	1	1	2	1	5	Fair
Yan et al., 2009 [35]	0	1	1	2	1	5	Fair
Prado et al., 2017 [36]	2	0	2	0	0	4	Fair
Sun et al., 2017 [37]	0	0	1	2	1	4	Fair
Berton et al., 2017 [38]	0	1	1	0	1	3	Poor
Valério et al., 2018 [39]	0	1	1	0	1	3	Poor