Table 3

Quality assessment of included studies

Study 1st author, yearStudy designQ1Q2Q3Q4Q5Q6Q7Q8Q9Q10Q11Q12Q13Q14Overall RoB
Arendt-Nielsen,42 2014CSYYYYNNANAYYNAYNNAY8/10=80% low
Imamura,43 2015CSYYYNNNANAYYNANYNAN6/10=60% moderate
Lee,44 2011CSYNYYNNANAYYNAYNRNAN6/10=60% moderate
Li,45 2020CSYYYYNNANAYYNAYNRNAN6/10=60% moderate
Neogi,50 2016CYYYYNYYYYYYYNY12/14=86% low
Petersen,49 2016CCYYYYNYCDYNYYY//9/12=75% moderate
Radojčić,46 2017CSYYYYNNANAYYNAYNRNAY8/10=80% low
Sofat,47 2019CSNYYYYNANAYYNAYYNAY9/10=90% low
Tchetina,48 2020CSYYYYNNANAYYNAYNRNAN7/10=70% moderate
  • <7 (50%)→<7 (50%)→high RoB=poor quality; 7–10 (50%–75%)→moderate RoB=fair quality; 11–14 (>75%)→low RoB=good quality.

  • C, cohort; CC, case–control; CD, cannot determine; CS, cross-sectional; N, no; NA, not applicable; NR, not reported; RoB, risk of bias; Y, yes.