Table 2.
Study quality on the PEDro scale: long-term adaptations to vibration
| PEDro scale items | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | Sum |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ahlborg et al49 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 4 | ||||||
| Camerota et al64 | ✓ | CR | ||||||||||
| el-Shamy51 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 8 | ||
| Gusso et al48 | ✓ | ✓ | 1 | |||||||||
| Ibrahim et al59 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 4 | ||||||
| Ko et al58 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 4 | |||||||
| Lee and Chon50 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 7 | |||
| Reyes et al57 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 8 | ||
| Ruck et al52 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 5 | |||||
| Semler et al53 | ✓ | CR | ||||||||||
| Stark et al55 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 3 | |||||||
| Stark et al56 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 3 | |||||||
| Stark et al54 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 8 | ||
| Tupimai et al36 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 4 | ||||||
| Unger et al46 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 6 | ||||
| Myśliwiec et al47 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 3 | |||||||
| Wren et al60 | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | 7 | |||
| Yabumoto et al63 | CR | |||||||||||
| Score per item/average score | 14 (15) | 11 (15) | 5 (15) | 10 (15) | 1 (15) | 0 (15) | 7 (10) | 11 (15) | 6 (15) | 10 (15) | 14 (15) | 4 |
Notes: Longitudinal experiments investigating the chronic effect of vibration therapy on neuromuscular and functional parameters, as well as muscle and bone tissue. The bottom line illustrates the relative number per PEDro item and the overall average score. Note that CRs were excluded from evaluation, as scaling and items are not applicable for these study designs. 1, Eligibility criteria and source of participants; 2, random allocation; 3, concealed allocation; 4, baseline comparability; 5, blinded participants; 6, blinded therapists; 7, blind assessors; 8, adequate follow-up; 9, intention-to-treat analysis; 10, between-group comparisons; 11, point estimates and variability. Item 1 does not contribute to the total score.
Abbreviation: CR, case report.