Table 2.

Risk-of-bias assessment expressed as PEDro scores

Study	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	Total
Balshaw et al. [30]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	8
Balshaw et al. [28]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	8
Bischof et al. [35]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	8
Centner et al. [50]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	8
Clifford et al. [37]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	10
Jendricke et al. [33]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	10
Jendricke et al. [23]	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	7
Jerger et al. [32]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	8
Jerger et al. [31]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	8
Jerger et al. [89]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	8
Kirmse et al. [51]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	9
Kuwaba et al. [36]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	8
Lee et al. [41]	1	1	0	1	1	1	0	0	0	1	1	6
Lis et al. [34]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	9
Lopez et al. [38]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	9
Oertzen-Hagemann et al. [90]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	10
Prowting et al. [71]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	10
Zdzieblik et al. [22]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	1	9
Zdzieblik et al. [24]	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	1	0	1	1	9

Total scores are in bold. Also include definitions: 1 = criterion satisfied, 0 = not satisfied. Rating: < 4 “poor”, 4–5 “fair”, 6–8 “good”, 9–10 “excellent” (the higher, the better). Criterions 1-11 are listed. Cristerion 1 is mandatory, but is usually not included in the calculation