Table 5.
Bruno et al. 2021 [21] | Dai et al. 2019 [25] | Garino et al. 2016 [29] | Kravitz et al. 2008 [33] | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Random sequence generation | LOW | SOME CONCERNS | LOW | LOW |
Allocation concealment | LOW | HIGH | LOW | SOME CONCERNS |
Blinding of participants and personnel | HIGH | HIGH | HIGH | HIGH |
Blinding of outcome assessment | SOME CONCERNS | HIGH | SOME CONCERNS | HIGH |
Incomplete outcome data | LOW | LOW | LOW | LOW |
Selective reporting | LOW | LOW | LOW | HIGH |
Other bias (why) | The bias comes from the difference between the bonding procedure and analyzing the data, as the templates and attachments differ from each other | Great loss to follow-up | The bias comes from the difference between the bonding procedure and analyzing data, as attachments are noticeable in the mouth | The pretreatment model was obtained by the indirect and direct methods, resulting in an uneven level of accuracy. |
Risk of bias judgement | SOME CONCERNS | HIGH | SOME CONCERNS | HIGH |