Quality appraisal was independently conducted by two authors; any discrepancies were resolved through discussion between two or more authors.
Data from included studies were independently extracted by two authors (Y.W.C and Y.C), and disagreements were resolved through discussion with the third reviewer (Z.X.L).
All retrieved articles were reviewed by two authors (L.S. and C.M .. Any disagreement was resolved through consensus or, if necessary, by discussion with a third author (M.R.T).
Potentially relevant articles were selected through initial title and abstract screening by two authors (MAH and SS) independently.
If articles were representative of the inclusion criteria, the articles went through two full-text independent reviews by two authors (MKC and JCM).
The data from these studies were extracted and analyzed independently by two authors (J.L.W. and K.D .. Level of evidence was determined through standard clinical guidelines as described previously.
Data were searched and extracted independently by two authors (RH and JM), the results were compared and consensus obtained through discussion.
A final coding scheme was applied by two authors (LW and AG), and the minimal number of disagreements were resolved through discussion.
