Advertisement
Table 4 Quality assessment sorted by study population and quality score
| First author, year | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4a | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | score | % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Banasik, 2011 [56] | Y | Y | Y | Y | SR | Y C | N | N | N | 5 | 63% |
| Banerjee, 2007 [51] | Y | Y C | Y | Y | Y | Y C | Y C | N | N | 7 | 78% |
| Blank, 2003 [31] | Y | ? | ? | Y | N | ? | N | N | N | 2 | 22% |
| Bower, 2012 [58] | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | ? | Y | Y | Y | 8 | 89% |
| Carson, 2009 [32] | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N C | N | N | Y | 6 | 67% |
| Chandwani, 2010 [55] | Y | Y C | Y | Y | SR | Y C | N | N, ES no CI | Y | 6 | 75% |
| Cohen, 2004 [44] | Y | Y | Y | Y | NC (SR) | N C | N | N, only 95% CI | N | 4 | 50% |
| Culos-Reed, 2006 [52] | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y C | Y C | N | N | Y | 7 | 78% |
| Danhauer, 2009 [53] | Y | Y | Y | Y | NC | N C | N | N | Y | 5 | 56% |
| Littman, 2011 [57] | Y | Y C | Y | Y | Y C | Y d | N | Y | N | 7 | 78% |
| Moadel, 2007 [54] | Y | Y C | Y b | Y | NC | N C | N | Y | Y | 6 | 67% |
| Raghavendra, 2007 [49] | Y | Y | Y | Y | SR | N | N | N | N | 4 | 50% |
| Rao, 2009 [50] | Y | Y | Y | Y | SR | N | N | Y | Y | 6 | 67% |
| Vadiraja, 2009a [46] | Y | Y | Y | Y | ? | ? | N | N, ES no CI | N | 4 | 50% |
| Vadiraja, 2009b [47] | Y | Y | Y | Y | SR | ? | N | Y | Y | 6 | 75% |
| Vadiraja, 2009c [48] | Y | Y | Y | Y | SR | ? | N | N, ES no CI | Y | 5 | 56% |
