Table 2 Risk of bias assessment of included studies.

From: The prevalence of hypertension in paediatric Turner syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

 Author (Year of Publication)

External validity items

Internal validity items

Overall score

Overall risk of bias

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Akyürek (2014) [25]

1

1

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

Moderate

Quezada (2015) [31]

1

1

0

0

1

1

0

1

1

1

7

Moderate

Hamberis (2020) [23]

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

3

High

Tahhan (2019) [32]

1

1

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

Moderate

An (2017) [26]

1

1

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

Moderate

Fudge (2014) [33]

1

1

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

Moderate

De Groote (2017) [27]

1

1

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

Moderate

Los (2016) [34]

1

1

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

Moderate

Price (1993) [20]

1

0

0

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

6

Moderate

Zhang (2019) [30]

1

1

0

0

1

1

0

0

1

1

6

Moderate

Sas (1999) [35]

1

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

1

1

4

High

Lebenthal (2018) [24]

1

1

0

0

1

1

0

0

1

1

6

Moderate

Akyürek (2015) [28]

1

1

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

Moderate

McCarthy (2008) [19]

1

1

0

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

7

Moderate

Lopez (2008) [29]

1

1

0

0

1

1

0

0

1

1

6

Moderate

Valencia (2011) [21]

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

4

High

Yeşilkaya (2015) [22]

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

4

High

  1. Items scored: 1. Was the study’s target population a close representation of the national population in relation to relevant variables? 2. Was the sampling frame a true or close representation of the target population? 3. Was some form of random selection used to select the sample, OR, was a census undertaken? 4. Was the likelihood of non-response bias minimal? 5. Were data collected directly from the subjects? 6. Was an acceptable case definition used in the study? 7. Had the study instrument that measured the parameter of interest been tested for reliability and validity? 8. Was the same mode of data collection used for all subjects? 9. Was the length of the shortest prevalence period for the parameter of interest appropriate? 10. Were the numerator(s) and denominator(s) for the parameter of interest appropriate? Answers: 0 = No, 1 = Yes. Overall risk of bias: Low (score > 8), moderate (score 6–8), or high (score ≤ 5).