Skip to main content

Table 5: Quality appraisal scores of articles included in meta-analysis using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS)

From: Obesity, hypertension and diuretic use as risk factors for incident gout: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies

Article Selection Comparability Outcome
1 2 3 4 1 1 2 3
Is exposed cohort representative? How was non-exposed cohort selected? How was exposed cohort selected? Clear, outcome wasn’t present? Are cohorts compatible? How was outcome assessed? Was follow-up long enough? Adequate cohort sample followed-up?
Roubenoff et al. 1991 C A* A* B A*, B* B* A* B*
Hochberg et al. 1995 C B D B A*, B* B* A* B*
Grodzicki et al. 1997 B* A* A* B - B* B D
Choi et al. 2005 C A* C A* A*, B* B* A* B*
Bhole et al. 2010 A* A* A* A* A*, B* B* A* B*
McAdams-DeMarco et al. 2011 A* A* C A* A*, B* C A* B*
Maynard et al. 2012 B* A* A* A* A*, B* C A* B*
Chen et al. 2012 A* A* A* A* A*, B* B* A* B*
McAdams-DeMarco et al. 2012 B* A* A* A* A*, B* C A* B*
Pan et al. 2015 A* A* B* A* A*, B* C A* D
Burke et al. 2016 B* A* A* A* A*, B* C A* D
  1. A indicates the highest methodological quality whereas D indicates the worst quality; An asterisk (*) denotes that the article has scored highest for that particular criterion. A comma (,) separating two scores denotes that an article i) matched exposed and non-exposed and ii) adjusted for potential confounding factors