<p>A score of 0 indicates “no”; a score of 1 or 2 indicates “yes”. Studies scoring ≥67% were considered high methodological quality, 34%–66% were considered moderate methodological quality, and ≤33% were considered low methodological quality. Given that the distribution of possible confounders in randomised controlled trials is related to chance alone, randomised controlled trials were not assessed for confounding.</p><p>ART, antiretroviral therapy; BMI, body mass index; NA, not applicable.</p
The maximal score for Newcastle-Ottawa scale is 9 stars: 4 stars for the selection process, 2 stars ...
<p>Note: For case-control studies, 1 indicates adequate definition of cases; 2, cases are representa...
<p><i>Note,</i> * = rated as meeting the quality criterion, - = rated as not meeting the quality cri...
<p>S1: Selection1-is the case definition adequate; S2: Selection2-representativeness of the cases; S...
<p>Note: “1”represented got 1 star</p><p>Quality assessment of included studies using Newcastle-Otta...
<p>‘Y’ denotes ‘yes’ and ‘N’ denotes ‘no’. Quality items: 1) Definition of case; 2) Representativene...
<p>a The outcome assessors were not blinded to the interventions implemented in any of the studies.<...
<p>Summary of the proportion of studies that fulfilled each quality assessment criterion. When no cl...
Quality assessment: The Newcastle Ottawa Scale [NOS] for assessing the quality of nonrandomized stud...
<p>Quality of the studies included in the meta-analysis assessed with Newcastle-Ottawa scale (n = 9)...
<p>NOS: Newcastle-Ottawa Scale</p><p>▲: One score in the item</p><p>Assessment of methodological qua...
*<p>Selection:</p><p>(1)Is this case definition adequate? A, yes, with independent validation; B, ye...
In newcastle-ottawa scale, studies with 9 stars were considered high quality.</p
<p>Quality Assessment of included studies based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scales.</p
-a<p>Newcastle-Ottawa Quality assessment scale not applicable (study design: randomized trial, highe...
The maximal score for Newcastle-Ottawa scale is 9 stars: 4 stars for the selection process, 2 stars ...
<p>Note: For case-control studies, 1 indicates adequate definition of cases; 2, cases are representa...
<p><i>Note,</i> * = rated as meeting the quality criterion, - = rated as not meeting the quality cri...
<p>S1: Selection1-is the case definition adequate; S2: Selection2-representativeness of the cases; S...
<p>Note: “1”represented got 1 star</p><p>Quality assessment of included studies using Newcastle-Otta...
<p>‘Y’ denotes ‘yes’ and ‘N’ denotes ‘no’. Quality items: 1) Definition of case; 2) Representativene...
<p>a The outcome assessors were not blinded to the interventions implemented in any of the studies.<...
<p>Summary of the proportion of studies that fulfilled each quality assessment criterion. When no cl...
Quality assessment: The Newcastle Ottawa Scale [NOS] for assessing the quality of nonrandomized stud...
<p>Quality of the studies included in the meta-analysis assessed with Newcastle-Ottawa scale (n = 9)...
<p>NOS: Newcastle-Ottawa Scale</p><p>▲: One score in the item</p><p>Assessment of methodological qua...
*<p>Selection:</p><p>(1)Is this case definition adequate? A, yes, with independent validation; B, ye...
In newcastle-ottawa scale, studies with 9 stars were considered high quality.</p
<p>Quality Assessment of included studies based on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scales.</p
-a<p>Newcastle-Ottawa Quality assessment scale not applicable (study design: randomized trial, highe...
The maximal score for Newcastle-Ottawa scale is 9 stars: 4 stars for the selection process, 2 stars ...
<p>Note: For case-control studies, 1 indicates adequate definition of cases; 2, cases are representa...
<p><i>Note,</i> * = rated as meeting the quality criterion, - = rated as not meeting the quality cri...