Table 2.
Methodological Assessment
| Reference | Selection | Comparability | Outcome | Total Points | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Representativeness | Selection | Ascertainment | Conflicted Interest | Comparability | Assessment | FU Length | Adequacy of FU | ||
| Cho JY [23] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
| Xiao L [24] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| Komatsu S [ 25] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| Zhang Y [26] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| Chen J [27] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| Yoon YI [28] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| Guro H [29] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| Rhu J [ 30] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| Xu H [31] | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
1 = consistent with criteria and low risk of bias; 0 = not consistent with criteria and high risk of bias. N/A indicates not applicable, FU follow-up
A maximum of 2 points can be achieved for this criterion