Table 1 Main information and risk of bias assessment of the included literature
Author | Journal IF and Type | Year of publication | Location | Total N | Injury fatalities N | Gender (Male/Female N) | Injury mortality / 105 | AHRQ score | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Teng YM [5] | 1.02 | 2021 | Guangxi / | 5 488 375 | 8451 | 4809/3642 | 153.98 | 7 | |
Wei XL [6] | 1.58 | √1√2√3 | 2020 | Jiangsu U | 14 625 370 | 23 177 | 1 0621/1 2556 | 158.47 | 7 |
Li ZK [7] | 2.84 | √1√2√3 | 2020 | Yunnan U | 9 502 667 | 12 114 | 6843/5271 | 127.48 | 7 |
Liao ZY [8] | 1.51 | √3 | 2020 | Sichuan U | 915 600 | 1317 | 731/586 | 143.84 | 7 |
Zhang CH [9] | 1.98 | √3 | 2020 | Chongqing / | 18 617 361 | 26 230 | 14 901/11 329 | 140.89 | 7 |
Huang LL [10] | 1.56 | √3 | 2020 | Guangdong U | 852 219 | 816 | 392/424 | 95.75 | 7 |
Xu C [11] | 1.81 | √3 | 2020 | Sichuan R | 353 759 | 448 | / | 126.64 | 7 |
Shi AY [12] | 1.27 | 2019 | Shanghai U | 1 760 189 | 2613 | 1241/1372 | 148.45 | 7 | |
Yu X [13] | 2.15 | √1√2√3 | 2019 | Beijing U | 1 675 901 | 1084 | / | 64.68 | 7 |
Zeng C [14] | 2.84 | √1√2√3 | 2019 | Guangdong U | 583 022 | 375 | / | 64.32 | 7 |
Huang CY [15] | 2.84 | √1√2√3 | 2018 | Jiangsu U | 18 804 009 | 28 332 | 13 155/15 177 | 150.67 | 8 |
Xiang YF [16] | 0.76 | 2018 | Zhejiang / | 696 443 | 1723 | / | 274.40 | 8 | |
Gong HY [17] | 1.98 | √3 | 2017 | Hubei U + R | 9 829 478 | 21 159 | 10 566/10 593 | 215.26 | 7 |
Zhang XY [18] | 1.86 | √1√2√3 | 2017 | Shanxi U | 4 149 374 | 5039 | 3036/2003 | 121.44 | 7 |
Zhang DK [19] | 1.01 | 2017 | Shandong U | 185 865 | 329 | 173/156 | 177.01 | 7 | |
Wang HF [20] | 1.02 | 2016 | Shandong U | 925 672 | 1081 | 654/427 | 116.78 | 6 | |
Dong H [21] | 2.37 | √3 | 2016 | Guangdong / | 2 594 725 | 2052 | 1030/1022 | 79.08 | 7 |
Mu SC [22] | 2.03 | √1√3 | 2016 | Shandong U | 252 873 | 356 | 209/147 | 140.78 | 7 |
Liu ZH [23] | 2.03 | √1√3 | 2015 | Shandong R | 338 156 | 402 | / | 118.88 | 7 |
Cai P [24] | 2.15 | √1√2√3 | 2014 | Zhejiang U + R | 1 756 853 | 5723 | 2945/2778 | 325.75 | 7 |
Wan QP [25] | 2.74 | √1√3 | 2014 | Shanghai / | 789 094 | 1039 | 408/631 | 131.67 | 7 |
Qin L [26] | 1.86 | √1√2√3 | 2014 | Liaoning / | 599 138 | 459 | / | 76.61 | 7 |
Bi SF [27] | 1.43 | 2014 | Neimenggu / | 1 618 047 | 1370 | / | 84.67 | 7 | |
Chen HJ [28] | 1.27 | 2013 | Zhejiang R | 486 555 | 1298 | 643/655 | 266.77 | 6 | |
Li L [29] | 2.15 | 2013 | Zhejiang / | 6 171 228 | 10,214 | / | 165.51 | 7 | |
Ying JW [30] | 2.02 | √1√2√3 | 2013 | Zhejiang R | 266 257 | 687 | / | 258.02 | 6 |
Shao YQ [31] | 2.15 | √3 | 2012 | Zhejiang / | 678 180 | 1727 | 863/864 | 254.652 | 7 |
Wang QQ [32] | 2.02 | √1√2√3 | 2012 | Zhejiang R | 242 870 | 849 | / | 349.57 | 7 |
Mei QH [33] | 2.15 | √3 | 2011 | Zhejiang U + R | 7 586 056 | 14 542 | 6895/7647 | 191.69 | 7 |
Xu HF [34] | 1.34 | √1√2√3 | 2011 | Guangdong U + R | 1 756 981 | 2576 | 1333/1243 | 146.6 | 7 |
Zhang YH [35] | 1.02 | √3 | 2011 | Jiangsu / | 2 026 492 | 2261 | / | 111.57 | 7 |
Xie HY [36] | 1.34 | √3 | 2011 | Guangdong U + R | 1 748 946 | 2576 | 1330/1246 | 147.29 | 6 |
Liang H [37] | 1.70 | √3 | 2010 | Guangxi R | 97 493 | 175 | 109/66 | 179.5 | 6 |
Zhou L [38] | 1.44 | 2008 | Shanghai U | 903 100 | 1069 | 422/647 | 118.37 | 7 | |
Gong HQ [39] | 1.18 | √1√2√3 | 2008 | Yunnan U + R | 480 301 | 952 | 579/373 | 198.21 | 5 |
Bai HZ [40] | 1.27 | √3 | 2008 | Shanghai U | 4 174 330 | 602 | 259/343 | 15.34 | 7 |
Ni JH [41] | 1.58 | 2008 | Shanghai / | 3 047 527 | 986 | 391/595 | 32.35 | 7 | |
Peng YY [42] | 2.03 | √3 | 2007 | Shanghai U | 552 208 | 559 | 326/233 | 101.23 | 7 |
Hu XQ [43] | 1.54 | √1√3 | 2007 | Zhejiang / | 110 313 | 298 | 135/163 | 270.14 | 7 |
Yang JZ [44] | 1.89 | √3 | 2006 | Guizhou U | 91 105 | 197 | / | 216.23 | 7 |
Sun XK [45] | √1√2√3 | 2006 | Jiangsu / | 164 624 | 231 | 120/111 | 140.32 | 7 | |