Skip to main content
. 2023 Aug 29;15:106. doi: 10.1186/s13102-023-00703-6

Table 3.

Results of the methodological quality evaluation

First author 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Scores
Ari(1) [12] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 18
Fortier [13] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 2 2 16
Paradisis [14] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 1 0 2 2 17
Loughran [15] 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 0 2 2 2 2 21
Ryan [16] 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 0 0 0 2 2 17
Fletcher(1) [17] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 1 2 15
Curry [18] 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 19
Nagle [19] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 1 2 2 2 19
Baumgart [20] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 18
Henning [21] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 2 2 16
Franco [22] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 2 2 2 20
Kopec [23] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 2 2 16
Oliveira [24] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 1 0 2 2 17
Unick [25] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 1 0 2 2 17
Kruse [26] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 18
Morrin [27] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 18
Yildiz [28] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 1 0 1 2 16
Chaouachi [29] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 1 0 2 2 17
Christensen [30] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 1 2 15
Fletcher(2) [31] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 18
Pagaduan [32] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 2 2 16
Byrne [33] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 18
Bafghi [34] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 1 2 17
Shi Huang [35] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 18
Baskurt [36] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 1 2 1 2 18
Ari(2) [37] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 18
Dallias [38] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 1 2 17
Utku [39] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 2 2 16
Jaggers [40] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 1 0 1 2 16
Vetter [41] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 1 0 1 2 16
Gelen [42] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 18
Nelson [43] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 1 0 1 2 16
Adam [44] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 1 2 17
Marinho [45] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 1 0 2 2 17
Perrier [46] 2 2 2 2 0 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 18

“1” indicates that the purpose of the study was clearly given; “2” indicates the consistency of the patients included; “3” indicates the expected data collection; “4” indicates whether the outcome indicators reflected the purpose of the study; “5” indicates whether the trial was blinded; “6” indicates whether the follow-up period was adequate; “7” indicates whether the loss of follow-up rate was less than 5%; “8” indicates whether the sample size was estimated; “9” indicates whether the selection of the control group was appropriate; “10” indicates whether the control groups indicated whether the control groups are synchronised; “11” indicates whether the baselines were comparable between groups; “12” indicates whether the statistical analysis was appropriate