“…Results of the methodological quality assessment are presented in Table 2 . Eight studies used a cross-sectional design (Torricelli et al, 2014 ; Tang et al, 2015 ; Cappellini et al, 2016 , 2018 ; Goudriaan et al, 2018 ; Hashiguchi et al, 2018 ; Kim Y. et al, 2018 ; Yu et al, 2019 ), four used case-control designs (Steele et al, 2015 , 2019 ; Shuman et al, 2016 , 2017 ), and four were retrospective cohort studies (Schwartz et al, 2016 ; Shuman et al, 2018 , 2019 ; Oudenhoven et al, 2019 ). Quality scores ranged from 5 to 13, one study received the grade “poor” (Torricelli et al, 2014 ), ten studies “fair” (Tang et al, 2015 ; Cappellini et al, 2016 , 2018 ; Shuman et al, 2016 , 2018 , 2019 ; Hashiguchi et al, 2018 ; Kim Y. et al, 2018 ; Steele et al, 2019 ; Yu et al, 2019 ), three studies “good” (Steele et al, 2015 ; Shuman et al, 2017 ; Goudriaan et al, 2018 ), and two studies “excellent” (Schwartz et al, 2016 ; Oudenhoven et al, 2019 ).…”