A Have the studies been critically appraised? What is best? Where do I find the information? eshould describe how the quality he Methods section should des stu was assess ng prede assessment of quality and a appro pria the type clini criteria used inding and complete ness of follow-up for intervention This paper:Yes No Unclear Comment: I Did they only include high quality studies? What is best? Where do I find the informa on? The nclusion should only be of studies at that The results should have low risk of bias for that question type information on the quality of the good RCTs for therapy good cohorts for individual studies such as blinding or follow up). This paper:.Yes▣No▣Unclear▣ Comme T Have the results been totaled up with appropriate summary tables and plots? What is best? Where do I find the information? The results of included studies should at least be The Results section should include all presented in a summary table.If the results are the summary tables and plots and an similar,there may be a meta-analysis with the explanation of the results results presented in a "forest plot".Ideally,this should also include a heterogeneity analysis. This paper:Yes▣No▣Unclear▣ Comment: H ..and heterogeneity between studies assessed and explained? What is best? Where do Ifind the information? Ideally,the results of the different studies should The Results section should state be similar or homogeneous.If heterogeneity ther the results are heterogeneous exists the authors may estim te whether the sibi0Cesares nt(chi-qrte) le reasons.The forest reasons for the heterogeneity should be quare test I explored present This paper:Yes▣No▣Unclear▣ Comment:A Have the studies been critically appraised? What is best? Where do I find the information? The article should describe how the quality of each study was assessed using predetermined quality criteria appropriate to the type of clinical question (e.g., randomization, blinding and completeness of follow-up for intervention questions). The Methods section should describe the assessment of quality and the criteria used. This paper: Yes □ No □ Unclear □ Comment: I Did they only include high quality studies? What is best? Where do I find the information? The inclusion should only be of studies at that have low risk of bias for that question type, e.g., good RCTs for therapy, good cohorts for prognosis(“good” may include generic issues such as blinding or % follow up). The Results section should provide information on the quality of the individual studies. This paper: Yes □ No □ Unclear □ Comment: T Have the results been totaled up with appropriate summary tables and plots? What is best? Where do I find the information? The results of included studies should at least be presented in a summary table. If the results are similar, there may be a meta-analysis with the results presented in a “forest plot”. Ideally, this should also include a heterogeneity analysis. The Results section should include all the summary tables and plots and an explanation of the results This paper: Yes □ No □ Unclear □ Comment: H …and heterogeneity between studies assessed and explained? What is best? Where do I find the information? Ideally, the results of the different studies should be similar or homogeneous. If heterogeneity exists the authors may estimate whether the differences are significant (chi-square test). Possible reasons for the heterogeneity should be explored. The Results section should state whether the results are heterogeneous and discuss possible reasons. The forest plot should show the results of the chi-square test for heterogeneity and discuss reasons for heterogeneity, if present. This paper: Yes □ No □ Unclear □ Comment: