Skip to main content
. 2020 Jul 17;2020:4140692. doi: 10.1155/2020/4140692

Table 2.

Methodological quality assessment of the included reviews using the AMSTAR-2 tool.

Included studies Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14 Q15 Q16 Overall quality
Gong [21] Yes No Yes No Yes Yes No No No No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Critically low
Gu et al. [22] Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes High
Tan et al. [7] Yes No Yes Partial yes No Yes No Yes Yes No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Critically low
Yang et al. [23] Yes No Yes No Yes Yes No Partial yes No No No No Yes No Yes Yes Critically low
Ma et al. [24] Yes No Yes Partial yes No Yes No Partial yes No No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Critically low
Shi et al. [25] Yes No Yes Partial yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Critically low
Liu et al. [26] Yes No Yes Partial yes No No No Partial yes Yes No No No Yes No Yes Yes Critically low
Liu et al. [27] Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Low
Wang et al. [28] Yes No Yes Partial yes Yes Yes No Partial yes Yes No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Critically low

Q1: did the research questions and inclusion criteria for the review include the components of PICO? Q2: did the report of the review contain an explicit statement that the review methods were established prior to the conduct of the review and did the report justify any significant deviations from the protocol? Q3: did the review authors explain their selection of the study designs for inclusion in the review? Q4: did the review authors use a comprehensive literature search strategy? Q5: did the review authors perform study selection in duplicate? Q6: did the review authors perform data extraction in duplicate? Q7: did the review authors provide a list of excluded studies and justify the exclusions? Q8: did the review authors describe the included studies in adequate detail? Q9: did the review authors use a satisfactory technique for assessing the risk of bias (RoB) in individual studies that were included in the review? Q10: did the review authors report on the sources of funding for the studies included in the review? Q11: if meta-analysis was performed, did the review authors use appropriate methods for statistical combination of results? Q12: if meta-analysis was performed, did the review authors assess the potential impact of RoB in individual studies on the results of the meta-analysis or other evidence synthesis? Q13: did the review authors account for RoB in individual studies when interpreting/discussing the results of the review? Q14: did the review authors provide a satisfactory explanation for, and discussion of, any heterogeneity observed in the results of the review? Q15: if they performed quantitative synthesis, did the review authors carry out an adequate investigation of publication bias (small study bias) and discuss its likely impact on the results of the review? Q16: did the review authors report any potential sources of conflicts of interest, including any funding they received for conducting the review?