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.