Table 2.

Quality evaluation of RCS included literature.

Included in the study	Grouping method	Report lost to follow-up	Blind method	Diagnostic criteria	Baseline	Confounding factor control	Total score
Liu Jianyong et al.	No specific description	No lost to follow-up	Not mentioned	The “gold standard” diagnosis	Well described, well balanced	Appropriate	9
Jun et al.	No specific description	No lost to follow-up	Not mentioned	The “gold standard” diagnosis	Well described, well balanced	Appropriate	9
Yuke et al.	No specific description	Reported lost to follow-up and the rate of lost to follow-up <10%	Not mentioned	Not described	Well described, well balanced	Appropriate	8