Skip to main content
. 2022 Sep 21;19(19):11910. doi: 10.3390/ijerph191911910

Table 4.

Quality analysis results.

Zakeri et al.
2012 [14]
Ali et al.
2020 [15]
Aterido et al.
2017 [16]
Li et al.
2014 [17]
Leite et al.
2015 [18]
Manzano et al.
2021 [19]
Chacon et al.
2020 [20]
Aurlene et al.
2020 [21]
Hammoudeh et al.
2018 [22]
Crincoli et al. 2020 [23] Fonseca et al.
2018 [24]
Choi et al.
2015 [25]
Artim-Esen et al. 2017 [26] Lee et al.
2013 [27]
Novak et al.
2018 [28]
1
2 🗶
3 🗶 🗶
4 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶
5 🗶
6 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶
7 🗶
8 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶
9 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶
10 🗶 🗶 🗶
11 🗶 🗶
12
13 🗶
14 🗶
15 🗶 🗶 🗶
16 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶
17 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶
18 🗶 🗶
19 🗶 🗶 🗶
20 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶
21 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶
22 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶 🗶
Total
Risk of Bias
16
Low
10
Mod
18
Low
16
Low
18
Low
20
Low
13
Mod
17
Low
14
Mod
18
Low
17
Low
18
Low
16
Low
18
Low
15
Mod

* Mod: Moderate.