Skip to main content

Table 2 Assessment of the risk of bias in each cohort study using the Newcastle–Ottawa scale

From: Meta-analysis of the prognostic and clinical value of tumor-associated macrophages in adult classical Hodgkin lymphoma

Study   Selection (0–4)   Comparability (0–2) Outcome (0–3) Total
REC SNEC AE DO SC AF AO FU AFU
Steidl et al. [10] 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9
Tzankov et al. [11] 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 6
Kamper et al. [12] 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 8
Hohaus et al. [13] 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 5
Zaki et al. [23] 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 4
Azambuja et al. [24] 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 8
Yoon et al. [14] 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 8
Tan et al. [15] 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9
Sanchez-Espiridion et al. [31] 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 4
Abdou et al. [16] 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3
Greaves et al. [17] 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9
Deau et al. [25] 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 4
Panico et al. [26] 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 6
Casulo et al. [18] 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 7
Koh et al. [19] 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 6
Ping et al. [27] 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 5
Klein et al. [28] 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 6
Touati et al. [20] 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 6
Kayal et al. [30] 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 6
Agur et al. [29] 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 7
Moreno et al. [21] 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 5
Jakovic et al. [22] 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 6
  1. “1” indicates that the study has satisfied the item and “0” indications the opposite
  2. REC representativeness of the exposed cohort, SNEC selection of the non-exposed cohort, AE ascertainment of exposure, DO demonstration that outcome of interest was not present at start of study, SC study controls for age, sex, AF study controls for any additional factors (Chemotherapy, radiotherapy), AO assessment of outcome, FU follow-up long enough (36 M) for outcomes to occur, AFU adequacy of follow-up of cohorts (≥90 %)