TABLE 3.
Authors’ judgement of study quality according to the “Modified Newcastle-Ottawa Risk of Bias Scoring System.ˮ
| Authors and year | Sample representativeness | Sampling technique | Ascertainment of non-receptive Diagnosis | Quality of Description of the Population | Incomplete Outcome data | Total score | Risk of bias |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ruiz-Alonso et al. (2013) | ★ | — | ★ | — | ★ | ★★★ | low |
| Mahajan. (2015) | ★ | — | ★ | ★ | — | ★★★ | low |
| Hashimoto et al. (2017) | — | — | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★★★ | low |
| Tan et al. (2018) | — | — | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★★★ | low |
| Bassil R.et al., 2018 | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | — | ★★★★ | low |
| Patel et al. (2019) | ★ | — | ★ | — | ★ | ★★★ | low |
| Neves et al. (2019) | ★ | — | ★ | ★ | — | ★★★ | low |
| Simon et al. (2020) | — | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★★★★ | low |
| Cozzolino et al. (2020) | ★ | — | ★ | ★ | — | ★★★ | low |
| Cohen et al. (2020) | — | — | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★★★ | low |
| Riestenberg et al. (2021) | ★ | — | ★ | ★ | ★ | ★★★★ | low |