Table 2 The literatures quality of cohort studies were evaluated using Newcastle-Ottawa scale
Author/year | Selection | Comparability | Outcome | Total | Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hu et al. | 3 | 2 | 3 | 8 | Excellent |
Siljander et al. | 3 | 2 | 3 | 8 | Excellent |
Wu et al. | 3 | 0 | 3 | 6 | Good |
Daas et al. | 3 | 2 | 3 | 8 | Excellent |
Fleischman et al. | 3 | 2 | 3 | 8 | Excellent |
Godoy-Monzon et al. | 4 | 1 | 3 | 8 | Excellent |
Triantafyllopoulos et al. | 3 | 2 | 3 | 8 | Excellent |
Lee et al. | 3 | 1 | 3 | 7 | Good |
Fransen et al. | 3 | 2 | 3 | 8 | Excellent |
Jelsma et al. | 4 | 2 | 3 | 9 | Excellent |
Langlois et al. | 4 | 2 | 3 | 9 | Excellent |
Amlie et al. | 4 | 2 | 3 | 9 | Excellent |
Nam et al. | 3 | 2 | 3 | 8 | Excellent |
Spaans et al. | 3 | 1 | 3 | 7 | Good |