Skip to main content

Table 2 Assessment of study quality included in the meta-analysis by Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS)

From: Associations between dietary patterns and the risk of breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Case-control studies

Case definition

Selection of cases

Selection of controls

Definition of controls

Control for most important factor1

Control for any additional factor2

Ascertainment of exposure

Same method of ascertainment for cases and controls

Non-response rate

Total scores

Mourouti et al., 2015 [70]

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

8

Castello et al., 2014 [67]

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

8

Tumas et al., 2014 [69]

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

Karimi et al., 2013

1

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

7

Bessaoud et al., 2012 [15]

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

0

7

Demetriou et al., 2012 [66]

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

8

Buck et al., 2011 [64]

1

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

0

5

Zhang et al., 2011 [65]

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

Ronco et al., 2010 [20, 63]

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

Cho et al., 2011

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

Wu et al., 2009 [12]

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

9

De Stefani et al., 2009 [61]

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

Murtaugh et al., 2008 [11]

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

8

Edefonti et al., 2008 [60]

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

Hirose et al., 2007 [59]

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

1

0

6

Cui et al., 2007 [16]

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

8

Ronco et al., 2006 [58]

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

1

1

7

Nkondjock and Ghadirian, 2005 [57]

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

8

Cohort studies

Selection of exposed cohort

Selection of non-exposed cohort

Ascertainment of exposure

Outcome was not present as baseline

Control for most important factor1

Control for any additional factor2

Assessment of outcome

Adequate follow-up period for outcome

Adequacy of follow up of cohorts

Total scores

Shin et al., 2016 [78]

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

7

Harris et al., 2016 [17]

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

7

Kojima et al., 2016

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

7

Catsburg (CSDLH), 2015

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

7

Catsburg (NBSS), 2015

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

7

Link et al., 2013 [13]

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

6

Baglietto et al., 2011 [77]

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

8

Cottet et al., 2009 [10]

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

Agurs-Collins et al., 2009 [76]

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

Velie et al., 2005 [75]

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

Adebamowo et al., 2005 [73]

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

7

Fung et al., 2005 [74]

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

Mannisto (NLCS), 2005

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

7

Mannisto (ORDET), 2005

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

6

Mannisto (SMC), 2005

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

7

Sieri et al., 2004 [72]

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

6

Terry et al., 2001 [71]

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

8

  1. 1 denote one score, 0 denote 0 score
  2. CSDLH, Canadian Study of Diet, Lifestyle and Health; NBSS, National Breast Screening Study; NLCS, Netherlands Cohort Study on Diet and Cancer; ORDET, Ormoni e Dieta nella Eziologia dei Tumori; SMC, Swedish Mammography Cohort
  3. 1The most important factors included age, BMI, energy intake. If a study adjusted for any of these three factors, it acquired one score
  4. 2Any additional factor is defined as any factor presented in Table 1 (confounding factors adjusted for in the multivariable analysis), but not including the above three most important factors. If a study adjusted for any of these additional factors, it acquired one score