Table 2. Assessment of Methodological Quality of Included Studies.
Randomizationa | Similar atbaselineb | Criteriaspecifiedc | Assessorblindedd | Allocationconcealmente | Variabilityoutcomef | ITAg | Totalscore | |
Burling (1992)[67] | Unknown | YES | YES | Unknown | YES | YES | YES | 5 |
Marcus (1995)[55] | YES | YES | YES | Unknown | Unknown | YES | YES | 5 |
Donaghy (1997)[26] | YES | YES | YES | Unknown | Unknown | YES | YES | 5 |
Martin (1997)[68] | YES | YES | YES | Unknown | YES | YES | NO | 5 |
Marcus (1999)[56] | YES | YES | YES | YES | Unknown | YES | YES | 6 |
Huang (2000a)[52] | YES | YES | YES | YES | Unknown | YES | NO | 5 |
Huang (2000b)[53] | YES | YES | YES | YES | Unknown | YES | YES | 6 |
Li (2002) [51] | YES | YES | YES | Unknown | Unknown | YES | YES | 5 |
Ussher (2003)[57] | YES | YES | YES | Unknown | Unknown | YES | YES | 5 |
Marcus (2005)[58] | YES | YES | YES | Unknown | Unknown | YES | YES | 5 |
Char (2006)[65] | YES | YES | YES | YES | Unknown | YES | YES | 6 |
Sareen (2007) [66] | YES | YES | YES | NO | Unknown | YES | YES | 5 |
Prapavessis (2007)[59] | YES | YES | YES | YES | Unknown | YES | YES | 6 |
Ussher (2007)[60] | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | YES | 7 |
Kinnunen (2008)[61] | YES | YES | YES | Unknown | YES | YES | NO | 5 |
Vickers (2009)[27] | YES | YES | YES | Unknown | YES | YES | NO | 5 |
Williams (2010)[62] | YES | YES | YES | Unknown | Unknown | YES | NO | 4 |
Bock (2012)[63] | YES | YES | YES | Unknown | Unknown | YES | YES | 5 |
Whiteley (2012)[64] | YES | YES | YES | Unknown | YES | YES | YES | 6 |
Li (2013)[54] | YES | YES | YES | Unknown | YES | YES | NO | 5 |
Smelson (2013)[69] | YES | YES | YES | Unknown | Unknown | YES | NO | 4 |
Zhuang (2013)[39] | YES | YES | YES | Unknown | YES | YES | NO | 5 |
Was randomization performed?
Were the groups similar at baseline regarding important prognostic indicators?
Were the eligibility criteria specified?
Was the outcome assessor blinded?
Was allocation concealment adequate?
Were point estimates and measures of variability presented for the primary outcome measures?
Did the analysis include an intention to treat analysis?