| Study |
Bias |
| Randomisation process |
Deviations from intended interventions |
Missing outcome data |
Measurement of the outcome |
Selection of the reported results |
Overall |
| Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Subgroup 2.1.1 Survival: therapeutic hypothermia with conventional cooling methods versus control |
| Bernard 2002 |
High risk of bias |
Quasi randomized trial |
Some concerns |
Carers and people delivering the intervention were aware of the participants' assigned intervention |
Some concerns |
5 out of 43 patients in the hypothermia group did not receive the intervention. |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Low risk of bias |
Result of overall RoB 2 assessment |
High risk of bias |
Quasi randomization |
| Dankiewicz 2021 |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Some concerns |
Carers and people delivering the intervention were aware of the participants' assigned intervention |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Some concerns |
Result of overall RoB 2 assessment |
| HACA 2002 |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Some concerns |
Carers and people delivering the intervention were aware of the participants' assigned intervention |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Some concerns |
Result of overall RoB 2 assessment |
| Hachimi‐Idrissi 2001 |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Some concerns |
Carers and people delivering the intervention were aware of the participants' assigned intervention. |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Some concerns |
Result of overall RoB 2 assessment |
| Hachimi‐Idrissi 2005 LSP |
Some concerns |
The method of randomisation was not described in this study but was described in other RCTs of the study group. |
Some concerns |
Carers and people delivering the intervention were aware of the participants' assigned intervention. |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Some concerns |
Result of overall RoB 2 assessment |
| Hachimi‐Idrissi 2005 SSP |
Some concerns |
The method of randomisation was not described in this study but was described in other RCTs of the study group. |
Some concerns |
Carers and people delivering the intervention were aware of the participants' assigned intervention. |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Some concerns |
Result of overall RoB 2 assessment |
| Lascarrou 2019 |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Some concerns |
Carers and people delivering the intervention were aware of the participants' assigned intervention. |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Some concerns |
Result of overall RoB 2 assessment |
| Subgroup 2.1.2 Survival: conventional cooling versus 36 °C |
| Kwon 2021 |
Some concerns |
More patients in the TTM 33 °C group received bystander CPR, but numbers were small and difference could have been due to chance. |
Some concerns |
Carers and people delivering the intervention were aware of the participants' assigned intervention. |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Some concerns |
Result of overall RoB 2 assessment |
| Nielsen 2013 |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Some concerns |
Carers and people delivering the intervention were aware of the participants' assigned intervention. |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Low risk of bias |
Adequate |
Some concerns |
Result of overall RoB 2 assessment |
