“…Among these, five low-risk studies [ 40 , 42 , 43 , 66 , 68 ] used the “random number table” in the assessment of sequence generation, seven high-risk studies [ 24 , 33 , 34 , 49 , 59 , 75 , 76 ] did not report the entry, and the remaining 48 studies had unclear detailed random methods. Although none of the studies mentioned random housing, the outcome measures in the 19 studies [ 20 , 23 , 26 , 27 , 29 , 30 , 34 – 36 , 38 , 41 , 45 , 46 , 48 , 50 , 52 , 59 , 73 , 75 ] were not influenced since the feeding conditions (such as temperature, lighting, and humidity) were described, and the bias was evaluated as low risk. The incomplete outcome data were detected in 27 high-risk articles [ 19 – 21 , 23 , 26 , 32 – 36 , 39 , 45 – 47 , 50 – 53 , 55 , 56 , 60 , 61 , 68 , 74 – 77 ] without any reason or appropriate method for describing the missing data, while 18 articles [ 22 , 24 , 25 , 27 – 31 , 38 , 41 , 49 , 54 , 57 , 64 , 70 – 72 , ...…”