We conducted and reported this systematic review and meta-analysis following the PRISMA statement (Moher et al, 2009).
We performed a meta-analysis following the guideline of methodology of the Cochrane Handbook for systemic review of interventions.
A protocol was developed prior to commencement of this meta-analysis following the Cochrane Back Review Group guidelines [ 22].
For any direct 'head-to-head' comparisons between two treatments, studies were pooled using meta-analysis, following methods recommended by the Cochrane Handbook [ 22].
Additional file 1: List of papers excluded from the current meta-analysis following full-text screening, and the reason for their exclusion.
Multiple existing, independent datasets will contribute de novo analysis results for meta-analysis, following coordinated meta-analysis protocols we have developed and implemented previously [ 37- 39].
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis following a predetermined protocol in accordance with the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) reporting guidelines.
This study used a random-effect meta-analysis following the MOOSE guidelines 12 for observational studies and the QUORUM guidelines for clinical trials.
Notably, this effect is specific for S2P as S5P or unph meta-analysis following CPSF73 knockdown did not show a change in TSS pausing.
We used a two-level bivariate meta-analysis following a random effects model to summarise the data and fit hierarchical summary receiver-operating characteristic (HSROC) curves.
A random-effects meta-analysis following the MOOSE guidelines [ 9] for observational studies and the QUORUM guidelines for randomized controlled trials was utilized [ 10].
