References
Shao Z, Fang X, Lv Q, Hu Z, Shao S, Hu Y, Wu A, Wang X (2018) Comparison of combined anterior–posterior approach versus posterior-only approach in neuromuscular scoliosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Spine J 27:2213–2222
Stang A (2010) Critical evaluation of the Newcastle–Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol 25:603–605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-010-9491-z
Zeng X, Zhang Y, Kwong J, Zhang C, Li S, Sun F, Niu Y, Du L (2015) The methodological quality assessment tools for preclinical and clinical studies, systematic review and meta-analysis, and clinical practice guideline: a systematic review. J Evid Based Med 8:2–10
Slim K, Nini E, Forestier D, Kwiatkowski F, Panis Y, Chipponi J (2003) Methodological index for non-randomized studies (minors): development and validation of a new instrument. ANZ J Surg 73:712–716
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shao, ZX., Fang, X., Lv, QB. et al. Reply to the Letter to the Editor of Fei Jia et al. concerning “Comparison of combined anterior–posterior approach versus posterior-only approach in neuromuscular scoliosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis” by Shao ZX, et al. [Eur Spine J; (2018) 27(9): 2213–2222]. Eur Spine J 28, 885–887 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-019-05899-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-019-05899-1