. 2014 Mar 21;9(3):e92671. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0092671

Table 3. GRADE assessment of outcomes.

Outcome	Quality assessment							Quality	Importance
	No of studies	Design	Risk of bias	Inconsistency	Indirectness	Imprecision	Publication bias
VAS	5	RCT	serious^a	no serious inconsistency	no serious indirectness	no serious imprecision	Undetected	Moderate	Critical
TT	2	RCT	serious^a	no serious inconsistency	no serious indirectness	no serious imprecision	Undetected	Moderate	Critical
Response rate	3	RCT	serious^a	serious^b	no serious indirectness	no serious imprecision	Undetected	Low	Critical
HTI	2	RCT	serious^a	serious^b	no serious indirectness	no serious imprecision	Undetected	Low	Important
PFT	4	RCT	serious^a	no serious inconsistency	no serious indirectness	no serious imprecision	Undetected	Moderate	Important
HPT	2	RCT	serious^a	serious^b	no serious indirectness	no serious imprecision	Undetected	Low	Important
Hypoechogenicity	3	RCT	serious^a	no serious inconsistency	no serious indirectness	no serious imprecision	Undetected	Moderate	Important

a Random sequence generation, allocation concealment and blind method were not reported in most studies.

b The heterogeneity among included studies was not neglectable.

RCT: randomization controlled trial; VAS: visual analogue score; TT: tenderness threshold; HTI: heel tenderness index; PFT: plantar fascia thickness; HPT: heel pad thickness.