Data collection and analysis
Titles and abstracts of records retrieved were examined by one reviewer and irrelevant records excluded. We extracted datas about trial characteristics (setting, MOIT regimen, and eligibility criteria), methodological quality, participants and outcomes of interest. Subsequently, two reviewers evaluated full-text records of all potentially eligible studies based on eligibility criteria and filtered out studies for this meta analysis. Disagreements between reviewers were resolved with discussion.
We assessed the risk of bias of the included studies based on the criteria established by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions[10]. In the meta-analysis of RCTs, dichotomous outcomes were expressed as a relative ratio(RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Datas were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis whenever possible. All analyses were performed by Review Manager Version 5.3. We planned to perform subgroup analysis according to the patients’ age (three years and older). Sensitivity analyses were conducted to determine the influence of the studies with a high risk of bias on the meta-analysis.