Table 2.

MINORS quality assessment.

Author-publication time	A clearly stated aim	Inclusion of consecutive patients	Prospective collection of data	Endpoint appropriate to the study aim	Unbiased evaluation of endpoints	Follow-up period appropriate to the major endpoint	Loss to follow up less than 5%	Prospective calculation of the study size	An adequate control group	Contemporary groups	Baseline equivalence of groups	Adequate statistical analyses	Total
Anzidei-2016 (27)	2	2	2	2	0	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	12
Bertrand-2018 (32)	2	2	2	2	0	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	14
Catane-2007 (33)	2	1	2	2	0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	9
Chan-2017 (34)	2	2	2	2	0	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	10
Chen-2018 (19)	2	2	2	2	0	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	14
Huisman-2014 (35)	2	2	2	2	0	2	0	2	0	0	0	0	12
Hurwitz-2014 (36)	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	24
Li-2010 (22)	2	2	2	2	0	2	2	0	0	0	0	0	12
Liberman-2008 (37)	2	2	2	2	0	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	14
Lee-2017 (13)	2	2	2	2	0	2	2	2	2	2	2	2	22
Namba-2019 (38)	2	2	2	2	0	2	0	2	2	2	2	2	20
Gianfelice-2008 (39)	2	2	2	2	0	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	14
Wang-2019 (40)	2	2	2	2	0	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	14
Harding-2018 (41)	2	2	2	2	0	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	14
Gu-2015 (42)	2	2	2	2	0	2	2	2	0	0	0	0	14
Not reported	0	0	0	0	14	0	4	3	12	12	12	12	69
Reported, inadequate	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1
Reported, adequate	15	14	15	15	1	15	11	12	3	3	3	3	110