Table 2.

Quality assessment using modified Jadad scores (Points 1–8) for the included studies in the meta-analysis.

References	Was the research described as randomized?	Was the approach of randomization appropriate?	Was the research described as blinding?	Was the approach of blinding appropriate?	Was the approach used to assess adverse effects described?	Was there a presentation of the inclusion/exclusion criteria?#	Was there a presentation of withdrawals and dropouts?#	Was the approach of statistical analysis described?	Total score (max-8)
Arik et al. (16)	1	1	0	0	0	1	1	1	5
Tulgar et al. (17)	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	7
Vindal et al. (39)	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	8
Houben et al. (18)	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	8
Baral and Poudel (19)	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	7
Bava et al. (20)	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	7
Khandelwal et al. (21)	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	7
Suseela et al. (22)	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	7
Ortiz et al. (23)	1	1	0	0	1	1	1	1	6
Saliminia et al. (24)	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	8
Basaran et al. (25)	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	8
Ra et al. (26)	1	1	0	0	0	1	0	1	4
El-Dawlatly et al. (27)	1	1	0	0	0	1	0	0	3
Chen et al. (28)	1	1	0	0	0	1	1	1	5
Shin et al. (29)	1	1	0	0	1	1	0	1	5
Dost et al. (30)	1	1	0	0	0	1	0	0	3
Baytar et al. (40)	1	1	0	0	0	1	1	1	5
Petersen et al. (31)	1	1	0	0	0	1	0	0	3
Venkatraman et al. (32)	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	7
Bhatia et al. (33)	1	1	0	0	1	1	1	1	6
Breazu et al. (34)	1	1	0	0	1	1	1	1	6
Breazu et al. (35)	1	1	0	0	1	1	1	1	6
Vrsajkov et al. (36)	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	7
Tor et al. (37)	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	8
Tolchard et al. (38)	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	7

^#“1” means “Yes”, “0” means “Not described”.