|
No.
|
First author, country
|
Selection
|
Comparability
|
Outcome
|
Total
|
|---|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
1
|
2
|
|---|
|
1.
|
Al Kasab S; North and South America, Europe [45]
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
**
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
8
|
|
2.
|
Cox M, USA [46]
|
*
|
*
| |
**
| |
*
|
*
|
6
|
|
3.
|
Havenon Ad, USA [48]
|
*
|
*
| |
**
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
7
|
|
4.
|
Kerleroux B, France [28]
|
*
|
*
| |
**
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
7
|
|
5.
|
Kwan J, UK [49]
|
*
|
*
| |
**
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
7
|
|
6.
|
McConachie D, UK [51]
|
*
|
*
| |
**
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
7
|
|
7.
|
Pop R, France [52]
|
*
|
*
| |
**
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
7
|
|
8.
|
Qureshi A I, USA [54]
|
*
| | |
*
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
5
|
|
9.
|
Yang B, China [29]
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
**
|
*
|
*
|
*
|
8
|
- Maximum point for comparability was 2
- Selection: (1) representativeness, (2) selection of non-exposed, (3) ascertainment of exposure, (4) demonstration that outcome was not present at the beginning
- Outcome: (1) assessment of the outcome, (2) follow up long enough, (3) adequacy of follow up
