## 2 Methods
### Synthesis Methods  
All the data items collected were inputted into a table, as well as the main conclusion about the GRF provided by each included study. The original data of each outcome measure are provided in Tables 2 and 3. All data contained have been weight-standardized by the authors, and no data preprocessing was performed. If missing results were not provided, we contacted the author for assistance. If still unavailable, the study was excluded from the analysis. The processed data were analyzed using ADDIS V1.16.8, an additional analysis tool produced by Drugis.org's Aggregate Data Drug Information System ([[http://drugis.org/software/addis/index](http://drugis.org/software/addis/index)]([http://drugis.org/software/addis/index](http://drugis.org/software/addis/index)) (accessed on 23 March 2023)). The effect size was computed, and the data were synthesized in a network meta-analysis. The findings and relevant graphs are comprehensively presented in the following sections.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l l l l} \hline  & **[PERSON] et al.**, **2019**[16] & **[PERSON]** & **[PERSON]** & **[PERSON]** & **[PERSON]** & **[PERSON] et al.**, **2016** & **[PERSON] et al.**, **1998**[21] \\  & **[PERSON] et al.**, **2021**[17] & **[PERSON] et al.**, **2007** & **[PERSON] et al.**, **2007** & **[PERSON] et al.**, **2019** & **[PERSON] et al.**, **2016** & **[PERSON] et al.**, **2010**[20] & **[PERSON] et al.**, **1998**[21] \\ \hline Q6: For the analysis in this paper, were the exposures of interest measured prior to measuring the outcomes? & Yes & No & Yes & Yes & Yes & No \\ \hline Q7: Was the timeframe sufficient to expect an association between exposure and outcome, if it existed? & Yes & NR & NR & NR & Yes & Yes \\ \hline Q8: Did the study examine different levels or categories of exposure in relation to the outcome, especially for exposures that can vary in amount or level? & No & No & Yes & No & No & No \\ \hline Q9: Were the exposure measures (independent variables) clearly defined, valid, reliable, and implemented & Yes & No & No & No & Yes & No & Yes \\ \hline Q10: Was the exposure(s) assessed more than once over time? & Yes & NR & NR & NR & No & Yes & NR \\ \hline Q11: Were the outcome measures clearly defined, valid, reliable, and consistently implemented for all participants in the study? & Yes & Yes & Yes & No & Yes & No & No \\ \hline Q12: Were the outcome assessors blinded to the exposure status of the participants? & NR & NR & NR & NR & NR & NR & NR \\ \hline Q13: Was loss to follow up after baseline & NA & NA & NA & NA & NA & NA & NA \\ \hline Q14: Were potential confounding variables measured and statistically adjusted for their impact on the exposure–outcome relationship? & Yes & No & Yes & Yes & Yes & Yes & No \\ \hline
**RATING** & FAIR & FAIR & FAIR & POOR & FAIR & POOR & POOR \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: _Cont._Through the construction of a network meta-analysis, a geometry of intervention comparisons is established (CINeMA, [[https://cinema.ispm.unibe.ch](https://cinema.ispm.unibe.ch)]([https://cinema.ispm.unibe.ch](https://cinema.ispm.unibe.ch)), accessed on 23 March 2023), and was utilized to demonstrate the structure of evidence. The geometry yielded insights into the system of the evidence: (1) the color of each represented the distribution of the risk of bias for every intervention (red indicates a high risk of bias, yellow indicates an unclear risk of bias, and green indicates a low risk of bias), and (2) the width of color lines represents the percentage of risk. When a review involves only two interventions in the evidence structure, a pairwise meta-analysis should be employed to analyze and synthesize the data; for comparisons involving more than two interventions, ADDIS is used to analyze and compare the evidence structure.