Table 2.
Quality evaluation of study methodology included in the literature.
| Study | Random allocation | Allocation concealment | Blind method | Whether to describe loss of follow-up | Selective results report | Other migration | Quality grade |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leite et al. [24] | Unclear | High | High | Yes | Low | Low | B |
| Koutsioumpa et al. [13] | Low | High | High | Yes | Low | Low | B |
| Patsaki et al. [25] | Low | Low | Low | Yes | Low | Low | A |
| Acqua et al. [26] | Low | Low | Low | Yes | Low | Low | A |
| Kho et al. [27] | Unclear | Low | Low | Yes | Low | Low | B |
| Vivodtzev et al. [28] | Unclear | High | Low | Yes | Low | Low | B |
| Rodriguez et al. [29] | High | Low | Low | Yes | Low | Low | B |
| Meesen et al. [30] | High | High | Low | Yes | Low | Low | B |
| Gruther et al. [31] | Low | High | Low | Yes | Low | Low | B |
| Hong Chen et al. [32] | Low | High | High | No | Low | Low | B |
| Jianlan Sun et al. [33] | Low | High | High | No | Low | Low | B |
Note: high: high risk offset; low: low risk offset. Yes: Loss of follow-up is described; No: There is no lost to follow-up.