Skip to main content
. 2016 Jun 28;2016(6):CD001218. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001218.pub3

2.

2

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study. Note: for trials including both a comparison with sham and a no‐acupuncture control/prophylactic drugs (Diener 2006, Facco 2008, Linde K 2005) blinding was assessed for the comparisons with sham. For the comparisons with no acupuncture/prophylactic drugs the risk of bias is high (no blinding).