Mishra 2000.
| Methods | RCT; 4 arms; assessed at pre‐treatment, post‐treatment | |
| Participants | End of treatment n = 94 Start of treatment n = 94 Sex: 77 F, 7 M Mean age = 35.8 (SD 9.9) Source = pain or rehabilitation clinic and volunteer Diagnosis = temporomandibular joint disorder Mean years of pain = 7.0 |
|
| Interventions | "Biofeedback" (BT) "Cognitive behavioural skills training" (CBT) "Cognitive behavioural skills training + biofeedback" "no treatment control" |
|
| Outcomes |
Primary pain outcome: CPI pain index Primary disability outcome: none available Primary mood outcome: none available Catastrophising outcomes: none Characteristic Pain Index (CPI) pain severity 0 to 100 Graded Chronic Pain Score Profile of Mood States total |
|
| Notes | CBT versus TAU, post‐treatment: analysis 3.1 BT versus TAU, post‐treatment: analysis 7.1 Yates quality scale: total quality = 19/35, design quality = 12/26, treatment quality = 7/9 |
|
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | High risk | "patients were assigned to group in a semi‐random fashion using the urn method of random assignment" |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | High risk | Not reported |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | High risk | Attrition not reported |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | High risk | Partially reported |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | High risk | Not reported |