“…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 , 78 ] were unclear of the attrition bias. Although none of the studies provided any protocol, almost all had reported the expected outcome indicators, and most of them were evaluated as the low-risk bias.…”