Table 3.

PRISMA and AMSTAR-2 items checklist for critical evaluation of the systematic review.

Items PRISMA (2009)
Title. Identify the publication as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both	Yes
Structured summary	Yes
Introduction. Justification	Yes
Introduction. Objectives	Yes
Methods. Protocol and registration	Yes, partial (no registration)
Methods. Eligibility criteria	Yes
Methods. Information sources	Yes
Methods. Search	Yes
Methods. Study selection	Yes
Methods. Data collection process	Yes, partial
Methods. Data list	Yes
Methods. Risk of bias in the individual studies	Yes
Methods. Summary measures	Yes
Methods. Synthesis of results	Yes
Methods. Risk of bias between studies	No
Methods. Additional analysis	No
Results. Study selection	Yes
Results. Study characteristics	Yes
Results. Risk of bias in the studies	Yes
Results of the individual studies	Yes
Removed. Synthesis of results	Yes
Results. Risk of bias between studies	No
Results. Additional analysis	No
Discussion. Summary of the evidence	Yes
Discussion. Limitations	Yes
Discussion. Conclusions	Yes
Funding	Yes
AMSTAR-2 (2017) criteria
Do the research questions and inclusion criteria for the review include PICO components?	Yes
Does the review report contain an explicit statement that the review methods were established prior to the review and justify any significant deviations from the protocol?	Yes, partial (no registration)
Do the review authors explain their decision about the study designs to include in the review?	Yes
Do the authors use a comprehensive bibliography search strategy?	Yes
Do the authors duplicate the selection of studies?	No
Do the authors duplicate data extraction?	No
Do the authors provide a list of excluded studies and justify the exclusions?	Yes, partial
Do the authors describe the included studies in sufficient detail?	Yes
Do the authors use a satisfactory technique to assess the risk of bias of the individual studies (for non-randomised intervention studies)?	Yes, partial
Do the authors report the sources of funding for the studies included in the review?	No (not available)
If a meta-analysis was performed, do the authors use appropriate methods for the statistical combination of results?	No meta-analysis
If a meta-analysis was performed, do the authors assess the potential impact of risk of bias in the individual studies on the results of the meta-analysis?	No meta-analysis
Do the authors consider the risk of bias of the individual studies when interpreting/discussing the results of the review?	Yes
Do the authors provide a satisfactory explanation and discuss any observed heterogeneity in the results of the review?	Yes
If a quantitative synthesis was performed, do the authors conduct an adequate investigation of publication bias and discuss its likely impact on the results of the review?	No meta-analysis
Do the authors report any potential conflict of interest, including any funding received to carry out the review?	Yes

Source: Romero et al.⁵¹