“…Of these, 177 were excluded as they were either duplicates or deemed unsuitable for the purpose of the meta-analysis (editorials, letters, reviews or case reports). The remaining 32 studies were carefully screened and after analysis of their abstracts and/or full-text only [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27] (one was a conference abstract 22 ) were considered adequate for inclusion in the systematic review (figure 1). Of these, only six studies, 16 19 22-25 provided enough details to be included in the meta-analysis.…”