Table 4.
Quality Assessment of Included Studies (N = 9)
| Quality item | Suo et al. [19] 2016 | Rosen et al. [18] 2011 | Lampit et al. [16] 2015 | Belleville et al. [21] 2014 | Lin et al. [17] 2014 | Strenziok et al. [24] 2014 | Lövden et al. [23] 2010 | Antonenko et al. [20] 2016 | Heinzel et al. [22] 2014 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PEDro Scale Items | |||||||||
| 1 | + | + | + | + | + | − | + | + | − |
| 2 | + | + | + | + | + | + | − | − | − |
| 3 | + | + | + | + | + | − | − | − | − |
| 4 | − | + | + | + | + | + | + | − | − |
| 5 | + | + | + | − | − | − | − | − | − |
| 6 | + | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | − |
| 7 | + | + | + | − | + | − | − | − | − |
| 8 | + | + | − | + | − | + | + | + | + |
| 9 | + | + | − | + | − | + | + | + | + |
| 10 | + | + | + | − | − | + | + | − | − |
| 11 | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
| Additional Items | |||||||||
| 12 | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + | + |
| 13 | + | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | − |
| 14 | + | − | − | − | − | − | − | − | − |
PEDro scoring system: receive a point (+) for each item that is met. When criteria were not met (−), no points were given
The maximum number of points is 10, which means excellent quality based on PEDro’s quality assessment
Additional Quality Assessment Items: Maximum score of 3
PEDro Scale
1. Eligibility criteria were specified (this item is not used to calculate the PEDro score)
2. Subjects were randomly allocated to groups
3. Allocation was concealed
4. The groups were similar at baseline regarding the most important prognostic indicators
5. There was blinding of all subjects
6. There was blinding of all therapists who administered the therapy
7. There was blinding of all assessors who measured at least one key outcome
8. Measures of at least one key outcome were obtained from more than 85% of the subjects initially allocated to groups
9. All subjects for whom outcome measures were available received the treatment or control condition as allocated or, where this was not the case, data for at least one key outcome was analyzed by “intention to treat”
10. The results of between-group statistical comparisons are reported for at least one key outcome
11. The study provides both point measures and measures of variability for at least one key outcome
Additional Items
12. Was cognition measured to assist the interpretation of neuroimaging results?
13. Was there a sample size calculation?
14. Was the compliance reported?