Table 2.

Detailed risk of bias and quality assessment using the QUIPs tool

Study	Study participation	Study attrition	PMP measurement	Outcome measurement	Study confounding	Statistical analysis and reporting
Ali 2017 [24]	moderate	low	moderate	moderate	low	low
Birk 2017 [43]	low	low	moderate	low	low	low
Branham 2018 [27]	moderate	low	moderate	low	low	low
Dave 2017 [44]	low	low	moderate	moderate	low	low
Delcher 2015 [50]	low	low	low	low	low	moderate
Kim 2013 [ 51]	low	low	moderate	moderate	low	low
Kinsell 2015 [ 40]	low	low	low	low	low	moderate
Li 2014 [ 52]	low	low	low	low	low	low
Maughan 2015 [ 25]	low	low	low	low	low	low
Mallatt 2017 [ 55]	low	low	low	low	low	low
McLaughlin 2016 [ 28]	moderate	low	moderate	moderate	low	low
Meara 2016 [ 48]	low	low	moderate	moderate	low	low
Meinhofer 2017 [ 53]	moderate	low	low	low	high	low
Nam 2017 [ 45]	low	low	moderate	moderate	low	low
Patrick 2016 [ 47]	low	low	moderate	moderate	moderate	low
Paulozzi 2011 [ 46]	low	low	moderate	moderate	moderate	low
Pauly 2018 [ 49]	low	low	low	low	low	low
Radakrishnan 2015 [ 39]	low	low	moderate	moderate	low	low
Reifler 2012 [ 42]	low	low	low	low	moderate	low
Reisman 2009 [ 19]	low	low	low	low	moderate	moderate
Simeone 2006 [ 41]	low	low	moderate	moderate	high	high
Surratt 2014 [ 26]	low	low	low	low	moderate	low
Overall % low	81.8%	100.0%	45.5%	54.5%	68.2%	81.8%
Overall % moderate	18.2%	0.0%	54.5%	45.5%	22.7%	13.6%
Overall % high	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%	9.1%	4.6%