Table 2 Risk of bias assessment of articles included for analysis in systematic review of arm A.

From: Strategies to reduce CMV infectivity in breastmilk to preterm babies – impact on transmission, nutrients, and bioactivity: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  

Risk domains

 
 

Author

Risk of Bias due to confounding

Risk of Bias in selection of participants into study

Risk of Bias in classification of interventions

Risk of Bias due to deviation from intended interventions

Risk of Bias due to missing data

Risk of Bias in measurement of outcomes

Risk of Bias in selection of the reported result

Overall

1

Welsh et al. [18]

Serious

Low

No information

Low

Moderate

Moderate

Moderate

Serious

2

Dworsky et al. [19]

Serious

Moderate

Moderate

Moderate

Low

Moderate

Moderate

Serious

3

Hamprecht et al. [4]

Low

Low

Low

Low

Moderate

Low

Moderate

Moderate

12

Yoo et al. [28]

Moderate

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Moderate

13

Stock et al. [29]

Low

Low

Low

Low

Moderate

Low

Low

Moderate

18

Donalisio et al. [30]

Low

Low

Low

Moderate

Low

Low

Low

Moderate

23

Gaya et al. [32]

Moderate

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Moderate

20

Bapistella et al. [31]

Low

Low

Low

Moderate

Moderate

Low

Low

Moderate

5

Buxmann et al. [35]

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

8

Wakabayashi et al. [42]

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

11

Omarsdottir et al. [24]

Moderate

Low

Low

Serious

Serious

Moderate

Serious

Serious

14

Hosseini et al. [16]

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

16

Balcells et al. [25]

Low

Low

Serious

Low

Low

Low

Low

Serious

19

Sam et al. [17]

Low

Low

Low

Low

Moderate

Low

Low

Moderate

15

Lloyd et al. [21]

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

17

Ben-Shoshan et al. [39]

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

22

Mikawa et al. [20]

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

21

Maschmann et al. [40]

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

24

Hernandez-Alverado et al. [33]

Moderate

Low

Low

Low

Moderate

Low

Low

Moderate

6

Jim et al. [36]

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

4

Jim et al. [26]

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Moderate

Moderate

7

Hayashi et al. [23]

Low

Low

Low

Serious

Low

Low

Low

Serious

9

Josephson et al. [27]

Moderate

Low

Low

Moderate

Moderate

Low

Low

Moderate

10

Romero Gomez et al. [38]

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

25

Volder et al. [34]

Low

Low

Low

Moderate

Low

Low

Low

Moderate

26

Pitino et al. [9]

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

Low

  1. Interpretation as provided in the ROBINS-I detailed guide:
  2. Low R.O.B: The study is comparable to a well-performed randomized trial.
  3. Moderate R.O.B: The study provides sound evidence for a non-randomized study but cannot be considered comparable to a randomized trial.
  4. Serious R.O.B: The study has some important problems.