Table 3.
Quality assessment of cross-sectional studies.
No | JBI checklist question | Cici and Yilmazel (2021) | Dalcali et al. (2021) | Deo et al. (2020) | Fitzgerald and Konrad (2021) | Gol and Erkin (2021) | Kalkan Uğurlu et al. (2021) | Kochuvilayil et al. (2021) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Were the criteria for inclusion in the sample clearly defined? | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
2 | Were the study subjects and the setting described in detail? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
3 | Was the exposure measured in a valid and reliable way? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
4 | Were objective standard criteria used for measurement of the condition? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
5 | Were confounding factors identified? | N | N | N | N | N | N | N |
6 | Were strategies to deal with confounding factors stated? | N | N | N | N | N | N | N |
7 | Were the outcomes measured in a valid and reliable way? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
8 | Was appropriate statistical analysis used? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Overall Appraisal | Include: 6 | Include: 5 | Include: 6 | Include: 6 | Include: 6 | Include: 6 | Include: 6 | |
Exclude: 2 | Exclude: 3 | Exclude: 2 | Exclude: 2 | Exclude: 2 | Exclude: 2 | Exclude: 2 | ||
Level of evidence | 4.c case series | 4.c case series | 4.c case series | 4.c case series | 4.c case series | 4.c case series | 4.c case series | |
No | JBI checklist question | Kusuma et al. (2021) | Li et al., 2021a, Li et al., 2021b | Mundakir et al. (2021) | Rosenthal et al. (2021) | Santoso et al. (2020) | Savitsky et al. (2021) | Sun et al. (2020) |
1 | Were the criteria for inclusion in the sample clearly defined? | N | Y | Y | N | N | N | Y |
2 | Were the study subjects and the setting described in detail? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
3 | Was the exposure measured in a valid and reliable way? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
4 | Were objective standard criteria used for measurement of the condition? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
5 | Were confounding factors identified? | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y |
6 | Were strategies to deal with confounding factors stated? | N | N | N | N | N | Y | Y |
7 | Were the outcomes measured in a valid and reliable way? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
8 | Was appropriate statistical analysis used? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Overall Appraisal | Include: 5 | Include: 7 | Include: 6 | Include: 5 | Include: 5 | Include: 7 | Include: 8 | |
Exclude: 3 | Exclude: 1 | Exclude: 2 | Exclude: 3 | Exclude: 3 | Exclude: 1 | Exclude: 0 | ||
Level of evidence | 4.c case series | 4.c case series | 4.c case series | 4.c case series | 4.c case series | 4.c case series | 4.c case series | |
No | JBI checklist question | Turan et al. (2021) | Vitale et al. (2020) | Zhu et al. (2021) | ||||
1 | Were the criteria for inclusion in the sample clearly defined? | N | Y | N | ||||
2 | Were the study subjects and the setting described in detail? | Y | Y | Y | ||||
3 | Was the exposure measured in a valid and reliable way? | Y | Y | Y | ||||
4 | Were objective standard criteria used for measurement of the condition? | Y | Y | Y | ||||
5 | Were confounding factors identified? | N | N | Y | ||||
6 | Were strategies to deal with confounding factors stated? | N | N | Y | ||||
7 | Were the outcomes measured in a valid and reliable way? | Y | Y | Y | ||||
8 | Was appropriate statistical analysis used? | Y | Y | Y | ||||
Overall Appraisal | Include: 5 | Include: 6 | Include: 7 | |||||
Exclude: 3 | Exclude: 2 | Exclude: 1 | ||||||
Level of evidence | 4.c case series | 4.c case series | 4.c case series |
Yes: 1, No= 0