Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 2 The assessment of the risk of bias in each cohort study using the Newcastle–Ottawa scale

From: Clinicopathological and prognostic significance of FOXP3+ tumor infiltrating lymphocytes in patients with breast cancer: a meta-analysis

Study Selection (0–4) Comparability (0–2) Outcome (0–3) Total
REC SNEC AE DO SC AF AO FU AFU
Ladoire S et al. [26] 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 5
Lee S et al. [30] 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 4
Mahmoud SMA et al. [27] 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 6
Liu F et al. [7] 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 7
West NR et al. [32] 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 6
Bates GJ et al. [23] 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 6
Takenaka M et al. [31] 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 6
Maeda N et al. [35] 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 6
Sun S et al. [36] 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 8
Aruga T et al. [24] 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 5
De Kruijf EM et al. [25] 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 7
Liu F et al. [28] 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 6
Liu S et al. [34] 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 6
Kim ST et al. [29] 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3
Tsang JY et al. [37] 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 4
Kim S et al. [33] 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 5
Seo AN et al. [38] 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 4
  1. REC representativeness of the exposed cohort; SNEC selection of the non exposed cohort; AE ascertainment of exposure; DO demonstration that outcome of interest was not present at start of study; SC study controls for age, sex; AF study controls for any additional factor; AO assessment of outcome; FU follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur (36 Months); AFU Adequacy of follow up of cohorts (≥90 %).“1” means that the study is meeted the item and “0” means the opposite situation