The characteristics of the frequent exacerbator with chronic bronchitis phenotype and non-exacerbator phenotype in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a meta-analysis and system review

Table 2 Methodological quality evaluation of studies included

Study ID	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	Total
Alcázar-Navarrete, B.2016	+	+	–	–	+	+	–	+	–	–	–	5
Arkhipov, V.2017	+	+	+	–	+	+	+	+	–	+	–	8
Calle Rubio, M.2017	+	+	+	–	+	+	–	+	–	–	–	6
Chee-Shee Chai2019	+	+	+	–	+	+	+	–	–	–	–	6
Corlateanu, A.2017	+	+	–	–	+	+	–	+	–	–	–	5
Cosio, B. G.2016	+	+	+	–	+	+	+	+	–	–	+	8
Golpe, R.2018	+	+	+	–	+	+	+	+	–	–	+	8
Koblizek, V.2017	+	+	+	–	+	+	+	+	–	–	–	7
Miravitlles, M.2015	+	+	–	–	+	+	+	+	–	–	–	6
Pan Qing2016	+	+	+	–	+	+	–	+	–	–	–	6

Note: +:YES; −:NO; 0:not clear. 1. Define the source of information (survey, record review); 2. List inclusion and exclusion criteria for exposed and unexposed subjects (cases and controls) or refer to previous publications; 3. Indicate time period used for identifying patients; 4. Indicate whether subjects were consecutive, if not population-based; 5. Indicate if evaluators of subjective components of study were masked to other aspects of the status of the participants; 6. Describe any assessments undertaken for quality assurance purposes (e.g., test/retest of primary outcome measurements); 7. Explain any patient exclusions from analysis; 8. Describe how confounding was assessed and/or controlled; 9. If applicable, explain how missing data were handled in the analysis; 10. Summarize patient response rates and completeness of data collection; 11. Clarify what follow-up, if any, was expected and the percentage of patients for which incomplete data or follow-up was obtained

ISSN: 1471-2466