Skip to main content
. 2018 Oct 1;2018(9):CD003968. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003968.pub5

Levy 2010.

Study characteristics
Methods RCT. 2 arms. Assessed at pretreatment, post‐treatment, 3‐month follow‐up, 6‐month follow‐up
Participants End of treatment: n = 168; follow‐up 3 months: n = 143; follow‐up 6 months: n = 154
Start of treatment: n = 200
Sex: 145 F, 55 M
Mean (SD) age = 11.21 years (2.55)
Source = paediatric gastroenterology clinics at Seattle Children's Hospital and the Atlantic Health System in Morristown, New Jersey. Seattle participants were also recruited through local area clinics and community‐posted flyers
Diagnosis = functional abdominal pain
Mean years of pain = 3+ episodes of abdominal pain during a 3‐month period
Interventions "Cognitive‐behavioural treatment"
"Educational intervention"
Outcomes Primary pain outcome: Faces Pain Scale‐Revised
Primary disability outcome: Functional Disability Inventory
Primary depression outcome: Children's Depression Inventory
Primary anxiety outcome: Multidimensional Anxiety Scale for Children
  1. Faces Pain Scale ‐ Revised

  2. Functional Disability Inventory

  3. Children's Depression Inventory

  4. Children's Somatization Inventory

  5. Multidimensional Anxiety Scale for Children

Notes COI: "William E. Whitehead is a member of the Board of Directors of the Rome Foundation. Nader Youssef is currently the Director of Clinical Research at AstraZeneca LP. At the time the study was conducted, however, he was not affiliated with this company and contributed to the project by his appointment at Goryeb Children’s Hospital."
Funding: "This study was supported by grant number 5R01HD036069 from the National Institutes of Health — National Institute of Child Health and Human Development."
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk "Randomisation was then performed by a different researcher using a computerised random‐number generator, stratifying by age."
Comment: probably done
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Low risk "Randomisation was then performed by a different researcher using a computerised random‐number generator, stratifying by age."
Comment: probably done
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes Low risk "Nurse assessors were blind to the treatment assignment of the children."
Comment: probably done
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes Unclear risk Attrition was described; significant differences between completers and non‐completers are not reported
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk Data were fully reported when requested