Syngelaki 2016 |
|
|
|
Random sequence generation (Selection bias) |
Low |
"Eligible women were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, with the use of computer-generated random numbers, to receive either metformin or placebo." |
|
Allocation concealment (Selection bias) |
Low |
"The appearance, size, weight, and taste of the placebo tablets were identical to those of the metformin tablets; both were purchased at full cost from University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust." |
|
Blinding of participants and personnel (Performance bias) |
Low |
"Double-blind" |
|
Blinding of outcome assessment (Detection bias) |
Unclear |
|
|
Incomplete outcome data (Attrition bias) |
Low |
"The analysis was performed according to the intention-to-treat principle" |
|
Selective reporting (Reporting bias) |
Low |
All outcomes were reported in a pre-specified protocol. |
|
Other bias |
Low |
No other sources of bias could be detected. |
Chiswick 2015 |
|
|
|
Random sequence generation (Selection bias) |
Low |
"We randomly assigned participants (1:1), via a web based computer generated block randomization procedure." |
|
Allocation concealment (Selection bias) |
Unclear |
|
|
Blinding of participants and personnel (Performance bias) |
Low |
"Double-blind" |
|
Blinding of outcome assessment (Detection bias) |
Low |
"Members of the independent Data Monitoring Committee had access to unmasked data reports, but had no contact with study participants." |
|
Incomplete outcome data (Attrition bias) |
Low |
"All randomly assigned patients to enter safety and efficacy analysis (ITT)" |
|
Selective reporting (Reporting bias) |
Low |
All outcomes were reported in a pre-specified protocol. |
|
Other bias |
Low |
No other sources of bias could be detected. |