Skip to main content
. 2022 Feb 24;9(3):296–311. doi: 10.1002/acn3.51516

Table 1.

Newcastle‐Ottawa scale for study quality.

Author, year Selection Comparability 1 Outcome/exposure Total score
1 2 3 4 1 2 2 3 3
Yoshitake, 1995 8
Hyman, 1996 7
Notkola, 1998 8
Slooter, 1999 7
Moroney, 1999 7
Kivipelto, 2002 8
Tan, 2003 8
Reitz, 2004 ★★ 8
Solfrizzi, 2004 7
Li, 2005 ★★ 9
Mielke, 2005 8
Reitz, 2008 ★★ 8
Raffaitan, 2009 ★★ 8
Reitz, 2010 ★★ 8
Mielke, 2010 ★★ 9
Beydoun, 2011 ★★ 9
Ancelin, 2013 ★★ 9
Taniguchi, 2014 7
Toro, 2014 8
Rantanen, 2014 ★★ 9
Sabrina, 2017 ★★ 9
Marcum, 2018 ★★ 9
Chung, 2019 ★★ 9
Svensson, 2019 7
Lee, 2020 ★★ 9

Studies with more than six stars were regarded as high quality.

1

Covariates of the included studies are list in Table S1.

2

Studies with more than 10 years of follow‐up are awarded an asterisk.

3

Studies with more than 75% follow‐up rate are awarded an asterisk.