Table 2.
Methodology quality of the included studies
| Study | Randomization | Double blinding | Withdrawn | Total score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monotherapy | ||||
| Laurin et al.
[24] |
Inadequate (no description) |
No |
5 vs. 5 |
2 |
| Lindor et al.
[25] |
Inadequate (no description) |
Yes |
6 vs. 2 |
4 |
| Dufour et al.
[20] |
Adequate (randomization list set up by pharmacy before study) |
Yes |
3 vs. 2 |
4 |
| Kiyici et al.
[26] |
Inadequate (no description) |
No |
NM |
2 |
| Hong Qian, et al.
[32] |
Adequate (1:1 ratio) |
NM |
0 vs. 0 |
3 |
| Zhu Hong-Juan
[27] |
Inadequate (no description) |
No |
0 vs. 0 |
2 |
| Ratziu et al.
[28] |
Adequate (1:1 ratio in blocks of four) |
Yes |
7 vs. 3 |
5 |
| Leuschner et al.
[29] |
Inadequate (no description) |
Yes |
39 in total |
4 |
| UDCA combined with other drugs | ||||
| Dufour et al.
[20] |
Adequate |
Yes |
3 vs. 2 |
4 |
| Zhuang Xue-shan
[30] |
Inadequate (no description) |
NM |
0 vs. 0 |
2 |
| Sun Yan
[31] |
Inadequate (no description) |
NM |
NM |
2 |
| Lv Hong
[33] |
Inadequate (no description) |
NM |
NM |
2 |
| Liu Zhi-ye [34] | Inadequate (no description) | NM | NM | 2 |
All comparisons were treatment vs. control; NM not mentioned.