Table 2 Methodological quality scores of included studies of repeated‐measures design (in alphabetical order on restoration and compensation therapy).

First author (year)	External validity			Internal validity
	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11
VRT
Balliet et al (1985)12	G	G	G	M	M	—	P	P	M	M	P
Kasten et al (1995)8	M	G	M	M	—	—	P	M	P	M	P
Julkunen et al (2003)6	G	M	P	M	—	—	M	G	M	G	P
Sabel et al (2004)7	G	M	M	G	—	—	G	G	M	G	P
Reinhard et al (2005)13	G	M	M	G	—	P	P	G	M	G	P
SCT
Kerkhoff et al (1992)11	G	M	P	M	M	—	P	G	G	M	P
Kerkhoff et al (1994)1	G	M	P	M	G	—	G	G	G	M	P
Zihl (1995)2	G	G	M	M	M	—	M	G	M	M	P
Nelles et al (2001)9	G	M	P	—	M	—	G	P	P	P	P
Pambakian et al (2004)10	G	M	P	M	G	—	G	M	M	M	P
SCT focused on reading
Kerkhoff et al (1992)15	G	M	G	M	—	G	P	G	G	M	P
Zihl (1995)16	G	G	G	—	—	M	P	G	G	M	P

–, not measured; G, good; M, moderate; P, poor.

Numbers correspond to questions in checklist for assessing methodological quality of subject within repeated‐measures design.