Table 4.
NOS score
| Author (refs.) | Representativeness of the exposed cohort | Selection of the non-exposed cohort | Ascertainment of exposure | Outcome of interest not present at start | Comparability: age and sex | Comparability: other factors | Assessment of outcome | Follow-up long enough | Adequacy of follow-up | Total NOS score | Study quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Roland [48] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 6 | Fair |
| Touzot [31] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 6 | Fair |
| Mazuecos [49] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 6 | Fair |
| Stock [50] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 6 | Fair |
| Stock [4] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 6 | Fair |
| Kumar [51] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 6 | Fair |
| Qiu [52] | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 7 | Fair |
| Tan [53] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 6 | Fair |
| Carter [54] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 6 | Fair |
| Gruber [55] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 6 | Fair |
| Gómez [56] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 6 | Fair |
| Izzo [17] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 6 | Fair |
| Roland [57] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 6 | Fair |
| Gasser [58] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 6 | Fair |
| Gathogo [10] | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 8 | Good |
| Baisi [59] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 6 | Fair |
| Xia [20] | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 9 | Good |
| Locke [11] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 8 | Good |
| Abbott [2] | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 7 | Fair |
| Cristelli Brazil [60] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 6 | Fair |
| Cristelli Spain [60] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 6 | Fair |
| Mazuecos [61] | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 8 | Good |
| Rosa [40] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 7 | Fair |
| Vicari [30] | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 7 | Fair |
| Bossini [27] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 6 | Fair |
| Mazuecos [9] | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 8 | Good |
| Gathogo [34] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 7 | Fair |
| Malat [62] | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 0 ○ | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 1 ● | 7 | Fair |
| Sum ● | 29 | 8 | 29 | 29 | 3 | 9 | 29 | 29 | 29 | ||
| Sum ○ | 0 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 26 | 20 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Percent ● | 100 | 28 | 100 | 100 | 10 | 31 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
Standardized assessment of study quality based on the Newcastle–Ottawa-Scale for cohort studies. Each of the 29 studies was assessed for the category’s selection (4 items), comparability (2 items), and outcome (3 items). Fulfilled and unfulfilled criteria are presented by of the solid rhomboid (●) and open circle (○), respectively. Study quality was graded as good (≥ 8 points), fair (6 or 7 points), and poor (≤ 5 points)