Skip to main content

Table 3 Risk of bias assessment of included cross-sectional studies

From: Effect of smoking cessation on tooth loss: a systematic review with meta-analysis

 Selection
(maximum 5)
Comparability
(maximum 2)
Outcome
(maximum 3)
Total
(maximum 10)
Albandar et al. 20101 1 3 5
Arora et al. 201031 1 5
Cunningham et al. 20164 2 1 7
Hanioka et al. 20073 1 3 7
Mai et al. 20131 2 3 6
Mundt et al. 20073 1 3 3
Musacchio et al. 20073 1 3 7
Ojima et al. 20073 1 3 7
Randolph et al. 20014 2 1 7
Simila et al. 20062 2 1 5
Torrungruang et al. 20120 2 3 5
Yanagisawa et al. 20091 1 3 5
Yanagisawa et al. 20102 1 3 6
Yoshida et al. 20010 1 3 4
  1. Scores ranged from 0 to 10 stars. Studies with 7–10 stars were arbitrarily rated as low risk of bias, 5–6 stars moderate risk of bias and < 5 high risk of bias