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