Table 5.

Risk-of-bias assessment of the included prospective cohort studies using the Newcastle–Ottawa Quality assessment Scale

Reference	Selection				Comparability	Outcome			Overall Quality
	Representativeness of the exposed cohort	Selection of the non-exposed cohort	Ascertainment of exposure	Demonstration that outcome of interest was not present at start of study	Comparability of cohorts on the basis of the design or analysis controlled for confounders	Assessment of outcome	Was follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur	Adequacy of follow-up of cohorts
Sonnery-Cottet et al. [55]	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	Good
Goncharov et al. [15]	/	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	Good
Helito et al. [21]	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	Good
Helito et al. [22]	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	Good
Rowan et al. [50]	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	Good
Vadalà et al. [58]	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	Good

*: criteria met, / Criteria not met or unable to determine

Good quality: 3 or 4 stars in selection domain AND 1 or 2 stars in comparability domain AND 2 or 3 stars in outcome/exposure domain

Fair quality: 2 stars in selection domain AND 1 or 2 stars in comparability domain AND 2 or 3 stars in outcome/exposure domain

Poor quality: 0 or 1 star in selection domain OR 0 stars in comparability domain OR 0 or 1 stars in outcome/exposure domain