Table 4.
Newcastle - Ottawa quality assessment scale for included studies.
| Newcastle - Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale for Cohort Studies | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Study | Selection |
Comparability |
Outcome |
Score | Evidence quality | |||||
| Representativeness of the exposed cohort | Selection of the non-exposed cohort | Ascertainment of exposure | Demonstration that outcome of interest was not present at start of study | Comparability of Cohorts on the Basis of the Design or Analysis Maximum: ☆☆ | Assessment of outcome | Was follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur | Adequacy of follow up of cohorts | |||
| Fu L et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 4 | Moderate risk of bias | ||||
| Guiling L et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 5 | Moderate risk of bias | |||
| Gemcioglu E et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 6 | Low Risk of bias | ||
| Cao Z et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 7 | Low Risk of bias | |
| Shi S et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 6 | Low Risk of bias | ||
| Yang R et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 6 | Low Risk of bias | ||
| Tsui E et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 6 | Low Risk of bias | ||
| Huang Jiana et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 6 | Low Risk of bias | ||
| Mishra C et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 5 | Moderate risk of bias | |||
| Wang Changzheng et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 4 | Moderate risk of bias | ||||
| Fang Z et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 4 | Moderate risk of bias | ||||
| Wang Menghan et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 3 | High Risk of bias | |||||
| Zhao C et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 7 | Low Risk of bias | |
| Kalal CR et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 6 | Low Risk of bias | ||
| Huang Juan et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 4 | Moderate risk of bias | ||||
| Shang H et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 4 | Moderate risk of bias | ||||
| Chen Xu et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 5 | Moderate risk of bias | |||
| Yamamoto A et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 5 | Moderate risk of bias | |||
| Barya P et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 3 | High Risk of bias | |||||
| Fang Hu et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 4 | Moderate risk of bias | ||||
| Qi J et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 6 | Low Risk of bias | ||
| Xu F et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 6 | Low Risk of bias | ||
| Wei Y et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 6 | Low Risk of bias | ||
| Wang Xue et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 8 | Low Risk of bias |
| Caillon A et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 7 | Low Risk of bias | |
| Wang Kun et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 4 | Moderate risk of bias | ||||
| Elavarasi A et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 4 | Moderate risk of bias | ||||
| Huang Wei et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 8 | Low Risk of bias |
| Dai Wanfa et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 4 | Moderate risk of bias | ||||
| Bing H et al. | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | ☆ | 5 | Moderate risk of bias | |||