The first part of this tool involves describing what was reported by the authors of each included trial. The second part consists of assigning a judgment related to the risk of bias for each domain. Two authors (ODS, CDN) independently assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. When necessary, the authors of the evaluated study were contacted for any clarification in this regard. We plan to perform a funnel plot to assess publication bias. The quality of the evidence was evaluated with the GRADE system, through the GRADE pro-GDTT tool (https://gradepro.org/). The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system initially classifies the quality of evidence as high or low, depending on the methodological design, from RCTs (initially of high quality) or observational studies. Subsequently, the authors rate the certainty of the evidence, which is applied to each outcome, according to different domains (risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness, and publication bias) with the option to lower their level of certainty one or two levels. In rare circumstances, the authors can increase the certainty (if there is a large magnitude of effect, dose-response gradient or all residual confounding would decrease the magnitude of effect). GRADE thus establishes four levels of certainty of the evidence: very low, low, moderate, and high.