Table 4.
Quality assessment of case-control study (n=1) and cohort studies (n=6) with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale
| Case-Control (n=1) | Author, Year | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Criteria | McDonald, 2018 | ||||||
| Selection | Is the case definition adequate? | ★ | |||||
| Representativeness of the cases | ★ | ||||||
| Selection of controls | NA | ||||||
| Definition of controls | NA | ||||||
| Comparability | Comparability of cases based on design or analysis | NA | |||||
| Exposure | Ascertainment of exposure | ★ | |||||
| Same method of ascertainment for cases and controls | ★ | ||||||
| Non-response rate | NA | ||||||
| Overall quality | Total number of stars (0–10) | 4 | |||||
| Cohort (n=6) | Author, Year | ||||||
|
| |||||||
| Criteria | Bansal, 2019 | Gleich, 2019 | Kimura, 2019 | Lin, 2018 | Mehta, 2020 | Vilches-Moraga, 2017 | |
| Selection | Representativeness of the exposed cohort | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ |
| Selection of the nonexposed cohort | NA | ★ | ★ | ★ | NA | ★ | |
| Ascertainment of exposure | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | |
| Demonstration that outcome of interest was not present at the start of the study | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | |
| Comparability | Comparability of cohort based on design or analysis | NA | ★ | NA | NA | NA | ★ |
| Outcome | Assessment of outcome | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ |
| Was follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | |
| Adequacy of follow-up of cohorts | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | |
| Overall quality | Total number of stars (0–13) | 5 | 7 | 6 | 6 | 5 | 7 |