Table 1 The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist for cohort study.
Braghetto et al. [16] | Kledi et al. [17] | Burgerhart et al. [18] | Del Genio et al. [19] | Rebecchi et al. [20] | Gorodner et al. [21] | Sioka et al. [22] | Valezi et al. [23] | Coupaye et al. [24] | Ruiz de Angulo et al. [25] | Raj et al. [26] | Castagneto-Gissey et al. [27] | Gemici et al. [28] | Greilsamer et al. [29] | Navarini et al. [30] | Quero et al. [31] | Tolone et al. [32] | Chern et al. [33] | Poggi et al. [34] | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Section A: Are the results of the study valid | |||||||||||||||||||
1. Did the study address a clearly focused issue? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
2. Was the cohort recruited in an acceptable way? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Can’t tell | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Can’t tell |
3. Was the exposure accurately measured to minimize bias? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
4. Was the outcome accurately measured to minimize bias? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y |
5. (a) Have the authors identified all important confounding factors? | Can’t tell | Y | Can’t tell | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Can’t tell | Y | Y | Can’t tell | Y | Y | Y | Y | Can’t tell | Can’t tell |
5. (b) Have they taken account of the confounding factors in the design and/or analysis? | Can’t tell | Y | Can’t tell | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Can’t tell | Y | Y | Can’t tell | Y | Y | Y | Y | Can’t tell | Can’t tell |
6. (a) Was the follow up of subjects complete enough? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
6. (b) Was the follow up of subjects long enough? | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y |
Section B: What are the results? | |||||||||||||||||||
7. What are the results of this study? | ↓ LESP | ↓LESP | ↓LESP ↑DMS | ≡LESP ↓LESL ↑DMS | ≡LESP ≡LESL ≡DMS | ↓LESP ≡LESL ↑DMS | ↓LESP ↓LESL | ↓ LESP | ↓LESP ↑DMS | ↓LESP ↑LESL ↑DMS | ≡LESP ≡LESL ↑DMS | ≡LESP ≡DMS | ↓LESP ≡LESL ↑DMS | ↓LESP ↓LESL ↑DMS | ↓LESP ↑DMS | ↓LESP ↓LESL | ≡LESP | ≡LESP ≡LESL ≡DMS | ↓LESP ↓DMS |
8. How precise are the results? | Precise | Precision lacking | Precise | Very precise | Very precise | Very precise | Precise | Precise | Precise | Precise | Precise | Precise | Precise | Precision lacking | Precise | Precise | Precision lacking | Very precise | Very precise |
9. Do you believe the results? | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Section C: Will the results help locally? | |||||||||||||||||||
10. Can the results be applied to the local population? | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
11. Do the results of this study fit with other available evidence? | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
12. What are the implications of this study for practice? | LVSG ↑ GERD risk | LVSG ↑ GERD risk | LVSG ↑ GERD risk | LVSG ↑ GERD risk | LVSG improves GERD | LVSG ↑ GERD risk | LVSG ↑ GERD risk | LVSG ↑ GERD risk | LVSG ↑ GERD risk | LVSG ↑ GERD risk | LVSG ↑ GERD risk | LVSG doesn’t ↑GERD risk | LVSG ↑ GERD risk | LVSG ↑ GERD risk | LVSG ↑ GERD risk | LVSG ↑ GERD risk | LVSG ↑ GERD risk | LVSG ↑ GERD risk | LVSG ↑ GERD risk |
