Table 3.

Quality assessment scores according to the NHLBI Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies.

Study	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4	Q5 na/justification b	Q6	Q7	Q8	Q9	Q10	Q11	Q12	Q13	Q14	Quality Rating
Affan et al., 2018	Yes	No	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	No	Poor
Bauer and Ceballos, 2014	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/Yes	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	No	Fair
Blanco-Ramos et al., 2019	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	Yes	Good
Courtney and Polich, 2010	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	No	Fair
Crego et al., 2009	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	Yes	Good
Crego et al., 2010	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	Yes	Good
Crego et al., 2012	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	Yes	Good
Folgueira-Ares et al., 2017	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	Yes	Good
Holcomb et al., 2019	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	No	Fair
Huang et al., 2018	Yes	No	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	No	Poor
Kiat and Cheadle, 2018	Yes	No	NR	No	No (BD = 13)/Yes	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	No	Poor
Kim and Kim, 2019	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	No	Fair
Lannoy et al., 2017	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	No	Fair
Lannoy et al., 2018	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	No (BD = 17)/No	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	Yes	Good
Lannoy et al., 2020	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	Yes	Good
López-Caneda et al., 2012	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes	Good

Study	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4	Q5 na/justification b	Q6	Q7	Q8	Q9	Q10	Q11	Q12	Q13	Q14	Quality Rating
López-Caneda et al., 2013	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes	Good
López-Caneda, et al., 2014b	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes	Good
López-Caneda et al., 2017a	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	No	Fair
López-Caneda et al., 2017b	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	Yes	Good
Maurage et al., 2009	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	No (BD=18)/No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes	Good
Maurage et al., 2012	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	Yes	Good
Na et al., 2019	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	No	Fair
Park and Kim, 2018	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	No	Fair
Petit et al., 2012	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	No (BD=18)/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	Yes	Fair
Petit et al., 2013	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	Yes	Good
Petit et al., 2014b	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	No/No	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes	Good
Ryerson et al., 2017	Yes	Yes	NR	No	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	No	Poor
Schroder et al., 2019	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	No	Fair
Smith and Mattick, 2013	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	No/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	No	Poor
Smith et al., 2015	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	No	Fair
Smith et al., 2016	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	No	Fair
Smith et al., 2017a	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	No	Fair
Smith et al., 2017b	Yes	Yes	NR	Yes	Yes/No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	NR	NA	No	Fair

Note. n^a = refers to having a reasonable sample size (≥20). Justification^b = refers to statistical justification of sample size, estimates of effect size, etc. NA = not applicable; NR = not reported; NHLBI = National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute