Code coverage is a popular and widespread test adequacy metric that measures the percentage of program codes executed by a test suite. Despite its popularity, code coverage has several limitations. One of the major limitations is that it does not provide any insights into the quality or quantity of test oracles, a core component of testing. Due to this limitation, several studies have suggested that coverage is a poor test adequacy metric; therefore, it should not be used as an indicator of a test suite's fault detection effectiveness. To address this limitation, researchers have proposed extensions to traditional structural code coverage to explicitly consider the quality of test oracles. We refer to these extensions as oracle-based code coverage. This survey paper studies oracle-based coverage techniques published since their inception in 2007. We discuss each metric's definition, methodology, experimental studies, and research findings. Even though oracle-based coverage metrics are proven to be more effective than traditional coverage in detecting faults, they have received little attention in the software engineering community. We present all existing oracle-based adequacy metrics in this paper and compare the critical features against each other. We observe that different oracle-based adequacy metrics operate on different coverage domains and use diverse underlying analysis techniques, enabling a software tester to choose the appropriate metric based on the testing requirements. Our paper provides valuable information regarding the limitations of oracle-based methods, addressing which may help their broader adoption in software testing automation.