Skip to main content

Table 2 The results of the methodological quality assessment of the meta-analysis

From: Effect of vitamin D supplementation on type 2 diabetes biomarkers: an umbrella of interventional meta-analyses

Citation (First author et al.)

Year

Q11

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Q7

Q8

Q9

Q10

Q11

Q12

Q13

Q14

Q15

Q16

Quality assessment

Akbari et al

2017

Yes

Yes

Yes

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

High

Ojo et al

2019

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

High

Guo et al

2020

No

Yes

Yes

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Moderate

Rezaei et al

2021

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

High

Sarathy et al

2014

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

No

Yes

Low

Tabrizi et al

2017

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Moderate

Zou et al

2021

No

Yes

Yes

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Moderate

Wei et al

2020

No

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Moderate

Wang et al

2021

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

High

Wang et al

2019

No

Partial Yes

Yes

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

High

Zhang et al

2021

No

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

High

Wu et al

2017

No

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Low

Elamin et al

2011

No

Partial Yes

Yes

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Low

Sahebi et al

2018

No

Partial Yes

Yes

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

Moderate

Tang et al

2018

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Moderate

Mirhosseini et al

2018

No

Yes

Yes

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

High

Milajerdi et al

2019

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

High

Li et al

2018

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

High

Lee et al

2017

No

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Moderate

Łagowska et al

2018

No

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

Moderate

Krul-Poel et al

2017

No

Partial Yes

Yes

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Moderate

Wang et al

2020

No

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

High

Jamka et al

2015

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

Moderate

Jahanjoo et al

2018

Yes

Yes

Yes

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Moderate

He et al

2018

No

Partial Yes

Yes

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

High

Emadzadeh et al

2020

No

Yes

Yes

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Moderate

Gasparri et al

2019

No

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

Moderate

Mirhosseini et al

2017

No

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

High

Ostadmohammadi et al

2019

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

Critically low

Guo et al

2020

Yes

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

High

Pramono et al

2020

No

Yes

Yes

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

High

Seida et al

2014

No

Partial Yes

Yes

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Moderate

Hu et al

2019

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

Low

Poolsup et al

2015

No

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Moderate

MIAO et al

2020

No

Partial Yes

Yes

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Moderate

Manousopoulou et al

2015

No

Yes

Yes

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

Moderate

Gallo et al

2019

No

Partial Yes

Yes

Partial Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Moderate

  1. * 1. Did the research questions and inclusion criteria for the review include the components of PICO? 2. Did the report of the review contain an explicit statement that the review methods were established prior to the conduct of the review and did the report justify any significant deviations from the protocol? 3. Did the review authors explain their selection of the study designs for inclusion in the review? 4. Did the review authors use a comprehensive literature search strategy? 5. Did the review authors perform study selection in duplicate? 6. Did the review authors perform data extraction in duplicate? 7. Did the review authors provide a list of excluded studies and justify the exclusions? 8. Did the review authors describe the included studies in adequate detail? 9. Did the review authors use a satisfactory technique for assessing the risk of bias (RoB) in individual studies that were included in the review? 10. Did the review authors report on the sources of funding for the studies included in the review? 11. If metaanalysis was performed, did the review authors use appropriate methods for statistical combination of results? 12. If metaanalysis was performed, did the review authors assess the potential impact of RoB in individual studies on the results of the metaanalysis or other evidence synthesis? 13. Did the review authors account for RoB in individual studies when interpreting/ discussing the results of the review? 14. Did the review authors provide a satisfactory explanation for, and discussion of, any heterogeneity observed in the results of the review? 15. If they performed quantitative synthesis, did the review authors carry out an adequate investigation of publication bias (small study bias) and discuss its likely impact on the results of the review? 16. Did the review authors report any potential sources of conflict of interest, including any funding they received for conducting the review? 
  2. Each question was answered with “Yes”, “Partial Yes” or “No”. When no metaanalysis was done, question 11, 12 and 15 were answered with “No metaanalysis conducted