Table 1.

Characteristics of the studies included in the meta-analysis.

No.	References	Type of research	Study region	Age (Years, ranges or means)	Assessment tools	Sample size	Population characteristics	Prevalence of PTSD (%)	Study quality
1	Hu et al. [14]	Cross-sectional research	Leshan and Jianyang, Sichuan Province, China	12–18 (Range)	The Children’s Revised Impact of Event Scale (CRIES)	2,090	Senior school students	6.90	Good
2	Krass et al. [23]	Clinical observations	Philadelphia, USA	11–17 (Range)	Clinical diagnosis	19	Laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 hospitalized children	63.00	Fair
3	Li et al. [24]	Cross-sectional research	Hubei, China	8–18 (Range)	The self-reported eight-item Children’s Revised Impact of Event (CRIES-8)	1,172	General children varied in ages	64.51	Good
4	Ma et al. [25]	Cross-sectional research	27 provinces in China	7–15 (Range)	IES-R	668	General children varied in ages	20.70	Good
5	Mensi et al. [26]	Cross-sectional research	Italy	12–18 (Range)	K‐SADS‐PL (DSM‐5) and supplement interview	1,262	General children varied in ages	50.04	Good
6	Murata et al. [27]	Cross-sectional research	United States	13–18 (Range)	PC-PTSD-5(the Primary Care PTSD Screen for DSM‐5)	583	Children lost someone due to COVID-19	45.00	Good
7	Shek et al. [11]	Cross-sectional research	Chengdu, China	13.15 (Mean)	The Children’s Revised Impact of Event Scale (CRIES-13)	4,981	General children varied in ages	10.40	Good
8	Yue et al. [15]	Cross-sectional research	Jiangsu, China	10.56 (Mean)	PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5)	1,360	General children varied in ages	3.16	Fair
9	Zhang et al. [12]	Cross-sectional research	Sichuan, China	Not reported	PCL-C	4,225	Middle school students	10.60	Fair
10	Zhang et al. [12]	Cross-sectional research	Guangzhou, Guang Dong, China	13.93 (Mean)	IES-R	1,025	Middle school students	21.70	Good