Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2012 Sep 1.
Published in final edited form as: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011 Sep;63(9):1295–1306. doi: 10.1002/acr.20519

Table 3.

Trial Quality Design Features

Allocation Concealment Randomization Method Intention-to-Treat Analysis Blinding of Participants Blinding of Providers Blinding of Outcome Assessor Description of Subject Compliance Evaluation of Treatment-Specific Losses to Follow-up
Naziroglu et al(25), 2009 Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported No No No No -
Teixeira et al(26), 2009 Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Yes Yes No Yes -
Huang et al(10), 2005 Yes Not Reported Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Polidori et al(27), 2005 Yes Not Reported Not Reported No No No Yes -
Van Hoydonck et al(28), 2004 Not Reported Not Reported No Yes Yes No Yes No
Vrca et al(29), 2004 Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported No No No No -
Yanai et al(30), 2004 Not Reported Not Reported No Yes No No No -
Nieman et al(31), 2002 Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Yes Yes No Yes No
Martinez-Abundis et al(32), 2001 Not Reported Not Reported No Yes Yes No No -
Hamilton et al(33), 2000 Not Reported Not Reported No Yes Yes No No No
Rokitzki et al(34), 1994 Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Yes Yes No No No
Maxwell et al(35), 1993 Not Reported Not Reported No No No No No -
Kyllastinen et al(36), 1990 Yes Not Reported No Yes Yes No No No

Summary of design characteristics reported by trials included in our meta-analysis. Trials that reported no loss to follow up did not receive a “yes” or “no” designation.