xRead - Treatment of Cleft Lip and Cleft Palate (May 2025)

analysis Total

Saralaya, 2020 2 2 1 2 0 1 2 0 NA NA NA NA 10 /16 Rauf, 2012 2 2 0 2 0 1 2 0 2 0 2 1 14 /24 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 16 /24

Bennett, 2017 2 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 2 2 2 2 14 /24

Khan, 2021 2 1 2 1 0 1 2 0 2 2 0 1 14 /24

Park, 2021 2 2 0 2 2 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 18 /24

Thanapaisal, 2022 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 18 /24

Kotlarek, 2022 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2 1 2 19 /24

Lo, 2022 2 2 0 2 2 2 0 0 2 0 2 2 16 /24

Kim, 2020 2 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 2 2 2 2 15 /24

Zhang, 2010 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 NA NA NA NA 4 /16

Gröbe, 2011 2 1 0 2 0 1 2 0 NA NA NA NA 8 /16

Ladani, 2016 2 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 NA NA NA NA 7 /16 Yamaguchi, 2016 2 2 0 2 0 2 1 0 NA NA NA NA 9 /16

Ruslin, 2018 1 2 0 1 0 1 2 0 NA NA NA NA 7 /16 Adeyemo, 2019 2 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 NA NA NA NA 6 /16 Thurston, 2020

2 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 NA NA NA NA 8 /16

Denadai, 2022a 2 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 NA NA NA NA 7 /16 Denadai, 2022b

2 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 NA NA NA NA 7 /16

Denadai, 2023 2 2 0 2 0 1 2 0 NA NA NA NA 9 /16 Ashtiani, 2011

1 2 0 2 0 1 2 0 NA NA NA NA 8 /16

Levi, 2009 1 2 0 2 0 1 2 0 NA NA NA NA 8 /16

statistical

Adequate

Baseline

equivalence of groups

Contemporary groups

group

Adequate control

calculation

Prospective

of study size

<5% lost to

follow-up

Follow-up period

appropiate

to study aim

assesment of study

endpoint

Unbiased

appropiate to study aim

Endpoints

Prospective data

collection

consecutive patients

Inclusion of

Table 4. MINORS Score for Non-Randomized Studies. Clearly stated aim

10