CSG 1991.
Methods |
|
|
Participants | Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
|
|
Interventions | Treatment group
Control group
|
|
Outcomes |
|
|
Notes |
|
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | To ensure an equal number of patients in each group, a block randomisation method was used. Randomisation was in blocks of 6 within each of the 10 participating departments. No details about the way the block randomisation was performed were reported. |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | Allocation concealed by drawing consecutively numbered sealed envelopes prepared by the manufacturer |
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Not reported |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | 36 children did not fulfil inclusion criteria (26 bacteriuria not significant, 10 provided bag sample); treatment was discontinued in 6 children before scheduled; 32 children did not have urine cultures completed within 10 days from treatment; 2 children were not evaluated for other reasons; 19 boys were excluded because of the small number and because they were not evenly distributed between groups. The side effects of the 95 children who were not analysed were included as they received treatment. |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | Planned outcomes were all analysed |