Table 2.

MINORS quality assessment

	A clearly stated aim	Inclusion of consecutive patients	Prospective collection of data	Endpoints appropriate to the aim of the study	Unbiased assessment of the study endpoint	Follow-up period appropriate to the aim of the study	Loss to follow-up less than 5 %	Prospective calculation of the study size	An adequate control group	Contemporary groups	Baseline equivalence of groups	Adequate statistical analyses	Total
Anania	2	2	1	2	1	2	0	0	2	1	2	2	17
Chaves	2	2	2	2	1	2	2	0	2	1	2	2	20
Fabozzi	2	1	0	2	1	2	2	0	2	2	2	1	17
Lee	2	2	0	2	1	1	2	0	2	2	2	2	18
Magistro	2	2	2	2	1	2	0	0	2	2	2	2	19
Marchesi	2	2	2	2	1	2	2	0	2	1	2	2	20
Milone	2	2	2	2	1	2	1	0	2	2	2	2	20
Scatizzi	2	2	2	2	1	2	2	0	2	2	2	2	21
Shapiro	2	2	2	2	1	1	2	0	2	2	2	2	20
Roscio	2	2	2	2	1	2	1	0	2	1	2	2	19
Trastulli	2	2	2	2	1	2	1	0	2	1	1	0	16
Vergis	2	2	1	2	1	2	2	0	2	1	2	2	19
Not reported	0	0	2	0	0	0	2	12	0	0	0	1	17
Reported, inadequate	0	1	2	0	12	2	3	0	0	6	1	1	28
Reported, adequate	12	11	8	12	0	12	7	0	12	3	11	10	98