Table 2.
Methodological quality of the included studies
| Study | Eligibility criteria specified | Random allocation | Concealed allocation | Comparable subjects | Blind subjects | Blind therapists | Blind assessors | Adequate follow-up | Intention to treat analysis | Between group comparison | Point estimation and variability | Total score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alon et al. [51] | Yes | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6/10 |
| Gabr et al. [64] | Yes | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4/10 |
| Kimberly et al. [53] | Yes | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8/10 |
| Hara et al. [62] | Yes | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 7/10 |
| Ng et al. [54] | Yes | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 6/10 |
| Sullivan al. [58] | Yes | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 6/110 |
| dos Santos-Fontes [61] | Yes | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8/10 |
| Ng et al. [55] | Yes | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 6/10 |
| Chan [60] | ||||||||||||
| Chen [59] | Yes | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8/10 |
| Minami [56] | Yes | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 4/10 |
| Choudry [52] | Yes | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 7/10 |
| Prathum [57] | Yes | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8/10 |
| Ko [63] | Yes | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 5/10 |