Efficacy of extracts from Datura Metel L. for Psoriasis: a meta-analysis of case series and single-arm studies

Table 2 Quality assessment of included studies

Retrospective study
Study ID	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4	Q5	Q6	Q7	Q8	Q9	Q10	Overall appraisal
Liu et al. (1980)	Yes	Yes	Unclear	No	No	Yes	Unclear	Yes	No	Yes	Include
Liu et al. (1983)	Yes	Yes	Unclear	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Include
Zhou et al. (1986)	Yes	Yes	Unclear	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Include
Chen et al. (1989)	Yes	Yes	Unclear	No	No	Yes	Unclear	Yes	No	Yes	Include
Qing et al. (1989)	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear	No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	Include
Single-arm & non-RCT study
Study ID	I	II	III	IV	V	VI	VII	VIII			Total
Wang et al. (1985)	2	2	1	2	0	2	0	0			9
Kang et al. (1999)	2	2	0	2	0	2	0	0			8
Zhou et al. (2011)	2	2	1	2	0	0	0	0			7
RCT study
Study ID	Generation of allocation sequence		Allocation concealment		Investigator blindness		Withdrawals and dropouts		Efficacy of randomization		Total
Yang et al. (2018)	1		1		0		0		0		2

Q1, Were there clear criteria for inclusion in the case series? Q2, Was the condition measured in a standard, reliable way for all participants included in the case series? Q3, Were valid methods used for identification of the condition for all participants included in the case series? Q4, Did the case series have consecutive inclusion of participants? Q5, Did the case series have complete inclusion of participants? Q6, Was there clear reporting of the demographics of the participants in the study? Q7, Was there clear reporting of clinical information of the participants? Q8, Were the outcomes or follow-up results of cases clearly reported? Q9, Was there clear reporting of the presenting site(s)/clinic(s) demographic information? Q10, Was statistical analysis appropriate?
I, a clearly stated aim; II, inclusion of consecutive patients; III, prospective collection of data; IV, endpoints appropriate to the aim of the study; V, unbiased assessment of the study endpoint; VI, follow-up period appropriate to the aim of the study; VII, loss of follow up less than 5%; VIII, prospective calculation of the study size. The items are scored 0 (not reported), 1 (reported but inadequate) or 2 (reported and adequate)

ISSN: 2662-7671