Table 3.
Quality assessment of studies according to Newcastle Ottawa Scale.
| Author, year | Study design | Score NOS | Punctuation | Failure in studies |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Martin et al., 2010 | Cohort | Very good | 7/9 | Selection of the non-exposed cohort; outcome of interesting in the beginning of study |
| Poetker et al., 2011 | Case Control | Very good | 9/9 | None |
| Franzoi and Araujo, 2005 | Cross-sectional | Good | 6/10 | Sample size; non-respondents; comparability between groups |
| Franzoi and Araujo, 2007 | Cross-sectional | Good | 6/10 | Sample size; non-respondents; comparability between groups |
| Tavares et al., 2010 | Cross-sectional | Good | 5/10 | Representativeness of the sample; sample size; non-respondents; comparability between groups |
| Netto and Brites, 2011 | Cross-sectional | Good | 6/10 | Sample size; non-respondents; comparability between groups |
| Mendes et al., 2013 | Cross-sectional | Good | 5/10 | Representativeness of the sample; sample size; non-respondents; comparability between groups |
NOS, Newcastle Ottawa Scale.