Table 2.
Quality ratings using criteria from the Delphi list (Verhagen et al., 1998) for randomized controlled trials of interventions to reduce sitting-time in non-workplace settings
| Criteria | Otten (22) | Aadahl (1) | Biddle (3) | Judice (14) | Lang (17) | Ellingson (9) | Kerr (16) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1a | Was a method of randomization performed? | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 1b | Was the treatment allocation concealed? | Yes | Yes | Yes | ? | No | ? | Yes |
| 2 | Were the groups similar at baseline? | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | ? | Yes | Yes |
| 3 | Were the eligibility criteria specified? | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes |
| 4 | Was the outcome assessor blinded? | ? | Yes | ? | ? | No | No | No |
| 5* | Was the care provider/interventionist blinded? | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 6* | Was the patient/participant blinded? | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 7 | Were the point estimate and measures of validity presented for the primary outcome measures? | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| 8 | Did the analysis include an intention-to-treat analysis? | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | ? | No | Yes |
| Total score | 6 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 4 | 6 | |
Scoring: Y=yes=1, N=no=0,? =unclear=0; maximum score=7; Inter-rater agreement: 94%
*
These criteria were omitted from the final quality assessment score as they were thought to be inappropriate for application to sedentary behavior interventions. Blinding of interventionists and participants in this type of intervention is usually not possible and none of the studies included in this review fulfilled these criteria.