Skip to main content

Table 5 Quality assessment using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cross-sectional studiesa

From: Association between type 2 diabetes (T2D) and tooth loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Study

Selection

Comparability

Outcome

Study score

Representativeness of the sample

Sample size

Non-respondents

Ascertainment of the exposure

Data/ results adjusted for relevant predictors

Data/results not adjusted for all relevant confounders

Assessment of outcome

Statistical test

Deborah L. et al., 2013 [38]

*

*

    

**

*

5/10

Sensorn, W. et al., 2012 [17]

   

*

  

**

*

4/10

Kapp, J. M. et al., 2007

*

*

*

   

**

*

6/10

Dar-Odeh, et al. 2019 [39]

*

*

    

**

*

5/10

Hastings, et al. 2017 [7]

    

*

*

**

*

5/10

Rai, et al. 2019 [40]

*

*

  

*

*

**

*

7/10

Simila, et al. 2018 [41]

*

*

 

*

  

**

*

6/10

Delgado-Pérez, et al. 2017 [29]

      

**

*

3/10

Buysschaert, et al. 2017 [30]

   

*

  

**

*

4/10

Kowall, et al. 2015 [44]

*

*

 

*

*

*

**

*

8/10

De Medeiros, et al. 2021 [45]

*

*

 

*

*

*

**

*

8/10

Del Carmen, et al. 2021 [47]

*

*

 

*

  

**

*

6/10

Laouali, et al. 2021 [48]

*

*

  

*

*

**

*

7/10

  1. aStudy score Very Good Studies: 9–10 points, Good Studies: 7–8 points, Satisfactory Studies: 5–6 points, Unsatisfactory Studies: 0 to 4 points