Zheng 2014.
Methods | RCT
Method of randomisation: randomisation by using random number table
Blinding: not stated Adverse effects: not stated ITT analysis: not stated Losses to FU: none |
|
Participants | Country: China Number of participants included: 60 (30/30) Demographics: aged 51‐79 years, 60% male Type of stroke: both ischaemic and haemorrhagic strokes Diagnosis: WHO definition Severity on entry: not stated Time from stroke onset: 1‐6 months Setting: inpatient Comparability: no significant difference in age or time post onset | |
Interventions | Comparison: acupuncture + WM versus WM Acupuncture treatment
Control interventions: WM |
|
Outcomes |
|
|
Notes | ‐ | |
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Randomisation by using random number table |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Information on allocation concealment was not reported |
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Information on blinding was not reported |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Information on blinding was not reported |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Information on blinding was not reported |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Quote: "No participants lost to follow‐up" |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | Free of selective reporting bias was assessed as 'unclear' due to some clinically important outcomes unstated, such as quality of life, mortality and adverse events |
Other bias | Unclear risk | No information provided |