Table 1:

The quality assessments based on Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for included cohort studies

Author		Selection				Comparability	Outcome
Author	Year	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	Quality Scores
Chalouhi et al¹⁵	2013	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	8
Zhang et al²⁹	2016	*	*	*		*	*	*	*	7
Lanzino et al²⁰	2012	*	*	*	*	*	*		*	7
Chalouhi et al¹⁴	2014	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	8
Chalouhi et al¹³	2017	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	8
Salem et al²⁴	2020	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	*	8
Durst et al¹⁷	2016	*	*	*		*	*	*	*	7
Yupeng Zhang et al²⁸	2019	*	*	*		*	*	*	*	7
Lu et al²²	2019	*	*	*			*	*	*	6
Silva et al²⁵	2019	*	*	*	*		*	*	*	7
Adeeb et al¹²	2017	*	*	*			*	*	*	6
Petr et al²³	2016	*	*	*	*		*	*	*	7
Zanaty et al²⁷	2014	*	*	*	*		*	*	*	7
Di Maria et al¹⁶	2015	*	*	*	*		*	*	*	7
Kim et al¹⁹	2014	*	*	*	*		*	*	*	7
Enriquez-Marulanda et al¹⁸	2019	*	*	*	*		*	*	*	7
Liu et al²¹	2018	*	*	*	*		*	*	*	7
Wang et al²⁶	2019	*	*	*			*	*	*	6

Note:—Asterisk indicates that the included study meet the quality assessment criteria.
A, Representativeness of the exposed cohort.
B, Selection of the nonexposed cohort.
C, Ascertainment of exposure.
D, Demonstration that the outcome of interest was not present at the start of the study.
E, Comparability of cohorts on the basis of the design or analysis.
F, Assessment of outcome.
G, Was follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur?
H, Adequacy of follow-up of cohorts.