Zika virus infection in pregnancy: a systematic review of disease course and complications

Table 2 Methodological quality assessment for case reports using the National Institute

Study ID	Ventura C. V [34, 38]	Ventura C. V [34, 38]	Sarno M [35]	Villamil Gomez W. E [24]	Thomas D. L [25]	Reyna-Villasmil [23]	Oliveira Melo [30]	Mlakar [36]	Meaney-Delman [37]	Calvet G [32]	Brasil Martines [27]	Besnard M [21]	de Paula Freitas [28]
1. Was the study question or objective clearly stated?	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES	NO	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES
2. Was the study population clearly and fully described, including a case definition?	NO	YES	YES	YES	NO	YES	NO	YES	YES	YES	NO	YES	YES
3. Were the cases consecutive?	YES	YES	NA	YES	NO	NA	YES	NA	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES
4. Were the subjects comparable?	YES	YES	NA	YES	NO	NA	YES	NA	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES
5. Was the exposure clearly described?	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES	NO	YES	YES
6. Were the outcome measures clearly defined, valid, reliable, and implemented consistently across all study participants?	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES	YES	NO
7. Was the length of follow-up adequate?	NO	YES	YES	YES	^aCD	YES	^aCD	YES	^aCD	YES	NO	NO	NA
8. Were the statistical methods well-described?	NO	YES	NO	NO	NO	NO	^bNA	NO	^bNA	^bNA	^bNA	^bNA	YES
9. Were the results well-described?	YES	YES	YES	YES	NO	YES	YES	YES	NO	YES	YES	YES	YES
Quality Rating (Good, Fair, or Poor)	FAIR	GOOD	GOOD	GOOD Letter to editor	POOR Selective reporting	GOOD Letter to editor	FAIR	GOOD	FAIR	GOOD	FAIR	GOOD	GOOD

ISSN: 1742-4755