Table 6.

Tool for evaluating the methodological quality of case-reports and case-series.

Domains	Leading explanatory questions	Li Y., et al. (2)	Chen H., et al. (3)	Fan C., et al. (4)	Chen Y., et al. (5)	Zhu H., et al. (6)	Liu W., et al. (8)	Wang X., et al. (9)	Liu Y., et al. (15)	Yu N., et al. (16)	Dong L., et al. (18)
Selection	1. Does the patient(s) represent(s) the whole experience of the investigator (centre) or is the selection method unclear to the extent that other patients with similar presentation may not have been reported?	No	No	No	No	–	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No
Ascertainment	2. Was the exposure adequately ascertained?	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No
	3. Was the outcome adequately ascertained?	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
Causality	4. Were other alternative causes that may explain the observation ruled out?	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
	5. Was there a challenge/rechallenge phenomenon?	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
	6. Was there a dose–response effect?	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
	7. Was follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur?	Yes	–	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Reporting	8. Is the case(s) described with sufficient details to allow other investigators to replicate the research or to allow practitioners make inferences related to their own practice?	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes

Questions 4, 5 and 6 are mostly relevant to cases of adverse drug events.