A Methodological and Reporting Quality Assessment of Systematic Reviews/Meta-Analyses about Chinese Medical Treatment for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Table 4

The result of PRISMA assessments.

Study	Title	Structured summary	Rationale	Objectives	Protocol and registration	Eligibility criteria	Information sources	Search	Study selection	Data collection process	Data items	Risk of bias in individual studies	Summary measures	Synthesis of results	Risk of bias across studies	Additional analyses	Study selection	Study characteristics	Risk of bias within studies	Results of individual studies	Synthesis of results	Risk of bias across studies	Additional analysis	Summary of evidence	Limitations	Conclusions	Funding	Scores
Song [15]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	0.5	0.5	1	0	1	0.5	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	0.5	1	1	0	19
Yang [16]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	1	0.5	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	22.5
Zhao [17]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0.5	0.5	0.5	0.5	0	0	0	1	1	0.5	1	1	0.5	0.5	0.5	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	0	17
Chen [18]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	0.5	1	0.5	1	0.5	1	0.5	1	1	0	0	1	0	1	1	1	0	1	1	0	1	0	17
Sun [19]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	0.5	0.5	1	0	1	0	1	1	1	1	0.5	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	0	18.5
Zhang [20]	1	0.5	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	0	1	1	1	0	1	1	0.5	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	22
Wang [21]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	23
Li [22]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	0.5	0.5	1	0	1	0	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	0	1	1	1	0.5	0.5	1	1	0	18
Pei [23]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	1	1	0.5	0.5	0	0	1	1	1	1	0	1	0	0.5	0	1	1	1	1	0.5	1	1	18
Guo [24]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	1	1	0.5	0.5	0.5	0	1	1	1	1	1	0.5	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	21
Ling [25]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0.5	1	0.5	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	23
Zheng [26]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	1	1	1	0	1	0	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	0	20
Zheng [27]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	0.5	0.5	0	0	0	0	1	1	0.5	1	1	0.5	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	0	17
Ge [28]	1	1	1	1	0.5	0.5	0	1	1	0.5	1	0	1	1	1	0	1	1	0	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	20.5
Zhu [29]	1	0.5	1	1	0.5	0.5	0.5	1	1	1	1	0.5	1	1	1	0	1	1	0	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	21.5
Ghung [30]	1	0.5	0.5	1	0	1	0.5	1	0.5	1	1	0.5	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	22.5
Chen [31]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0.5	1	1	0.5	0.5	0.5	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	0.5	1	1	1	1	1	1	0.5	0	21
Chen [32]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	0	0.5	1	0	1	0	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	0.5	1	1	0	18
Dai [33]	1	0.5	1	0.5	1	1	1	1	0.5	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	24.5
Li [34]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	0	1	1	0	1	1	0.5	1	1	0.5	0	0.5	1	0.5	1	1	0	0.5	1	1	1	1	18.5
Xie [35]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	1	1	1	0	0.5	1	1	1	1	0	0	0.5	1	1	0.5	1	0	1	0.5	0.5	0	1	17.5
Xiao [36]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0.5	1	0.5	1	0.5	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	23.5
Zhu [37]	1	0.5	1	0.5	1	1	1	1	0.5	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0.5	1	1	1	1	0.5	0.5	1	1	1	1	24
Li [38]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	1	1	1	0	0.5	1	0	1	0	0.5	0	1	0	1	1	1	1	0	0	0.5	0.5	1	16
Xie [39]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	1	1	0.5	0	0.5	1	1	1	1	0.5	1	1	1	1	0	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	20.5
Fu [40]	1	0.5	1	1	0	1	1	1	0	1	1	0.5	1	1	1	0	0.5	1	0	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	20.5
Li [41]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	1	1	1	0	0.5	1	0	1	0	0	0	1	0	1	1	1	1	0	0	0.5	0.5	1	15.5
Song [42]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	0.5	0.5	1	0	1	0	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	0.5	1	1	0	18.5
Wu [43]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	0.5	1	1	0	1	1	0	1	1	1	0	0.5	1	0	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	19
Xiao [44]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	1	1	0.5	0.5	0.5	0	1	1	1	1	0	1	0	0.5	0	1	1	1	1	0.5	1	1	18.5
Song [44]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	1	1	0.5	0.5	0.5	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	0.5	1	21
Li [45]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	1	1	1	0.5	0	1	0	1	0	0	0	1	0	0.5	1	1	1	0	0	0.5	0.5	1	15
Li [46]	1	0.5	1	0.5	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	25
Yes (%)	33 (100%)	0 (0%)	33 (100%)	5 (15.2%)	0 (0%)	22 (66.6%)	20 (60.6)	24 (72.8%)	4 (13.3%)	19 (57.6%)	22 (66.7%)	22 (66.7%)	33 (100%)	28 (8.8%)	25 (75.7%)	23 (69.7%)	25 (75.7%)	26 (78.8%)	16 (48.7%)	29 (87.9%)	33 (100%)	29 (87.9%)	21 (63.6%)	22 (66.6%)	26 (78.8%)	27 (81.8%)	20 (60.6%)
Partial yes (%)	0 (0%)	33 (100%)	0 (0%)	14 (84.8%)	0 (0%)	9 (27.3%)	12 (36.4%)	8 (24.2%)	10 (30.1%)	10 (30.1%)	0 (0%)	5 (15.2%)	0 (0%)	2 (6.1%)	3 (9.1%)	1 (3.0%)	8 (24.2%)	1 (3.0%)	7 (21.2%)	1 (3.0%)	0 (0%)	1 (3.0%)	3 (9.1%)	5 (15.2%)	6 (18.2%)	5 (15.2%)	0 (0%)
No (%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	0 (0%)	33 (100%)	2 (6.1%)	1 (3.0%)	1 (3.0%)	19 (57.6%)	4 (13.3%)	11 (33.3%)	6 (18.2%)	0 (0%)	3 (9.1%)	5 (15.2%)	9 (27.3%)	0 (0%)	6 (18.2%)	10 (30.1%)	3 (9.1%)	0 (0%)	3 (9.1%)	9 (27.3%)	6 (18.2%)	1 (3.0%)	1 (3.0%)	13 (39.4%)

Notes: ; ; .