Table S1. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) to evaluate the studies included.
| Study | Selection | Comparability | Outcomes | NOS score | Quality | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | |||||
| Acharya 2017 (22) | * | * | * | – | ** | * | * | * | 8 | High | ||
| Ahmed 2016.1 (23) | * | * | * | – | ** | * | * | * | 8 | High | ||
| Ahmed 2016.2 (18) | * | * | * | – | ** | * | – | * | 7 | High | ||
| An 2017 (24) | * | * | * | – | ** | * | * | * | 8 | High | ||
| Chen 2018 (19) | * | * | * | – | ** | * | * | * | 8 | High | ||
| Choong 2017 (25) | * | * | * | – | ** | * | * | * | 8 | High | ||
| Diao 2018.1 (38) | * | * | * | – | ** | * | * | * | 8 | High | ||
| Diao 2018.2 (26) | * | * | * | – | ** | * | * | * | 8 | High | ||
| Gabani 2018 (20) | * | * | * | – | ** | * | * | * | 8 | High | ||
| Gaudy-Marqueste 2017 (27) | * | * | * | – | * | * | * | * | 7 | High | ||
| Glenn 2019 (41) | * | * | * | – | * | * | – | * | 6 | High | ||
| Goel 2017 (35) | * | * | * | – | * | * | – | * | 6 | High | ||
| Henson 2016 (36) | * | * | * | – | * | * | – | * | 6 | High | ||
| Kaidar-Person 2017 (28) | * | * | * | – | ** | * | * | * | 8 | High | ||
| Kim 2017 (40) | * | * | * | ** | * | – | * | 7 | High | |||
| Knisely 2012 (29) | * | * | * | – | ** | * | * | * | 8 | High | ||
| Kotecha 2018 (17) | * | * | * | – | ** | * | * | * | 8 | High | ||
| Lanier 2019 (30) | * | * | * | – | ** | * | – | * | 7 | High | ||
| Nguyen 2018 (32) | * | * | * | – | * | * | – | * | 6 | High | ||
| Nguyen 2017 (31) | * | * | * | – | * | * | * | * | 7 | High | ||
| Patel 2017 (37) | * | * | * | – | ** | * | * | * | 8 | High | ||
| Rauschenberg 2019 (33) | * | * | * | – | ** | * | * | * | 8 | High | ||
| Shepard 2019 (12) | * | * | * | – | ** | * | * | * | 8 | High | ||
| Silk 2013 (34) | * | * | * | – | ** | * | * | * | 8 | High | ||
| Stokes 2017 (21) | * | * | * | – | ** | * | * | * | 8 | High | ||
| Yusuf 2017 (39) | * | * | * | – | ** | * | * | * | 8 | High | ||
Notes: 1. Representativeness of the exposed cohort; 2. Selection of the non-exposed cohort; 3. Ascertainment of exposure; 4. Demonstration that outcome of interest was not present at start of study; 5. Comparability of cohorts on the basis of the design or analysis; 6. Assessment of outcome; 7. Was follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur; 8. Adequacy of follow-up of cohorts.