Skip to main content
. 2017 Jun 6;2017(6):CD012143. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012143.pub2
Methods For characteristics see Rodriguez‐Torres 2014a1
Participants
Interventions
Outcomes
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Unclear risk Not described
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Not described
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes Unclear risk The study was described as double‐blinded, but it was unclear how the blinding was maintained
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes Unclear risk The study was described as double‐blinded but it was unclear how the blinding was maintained and who performed the outcome assessment.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk 4 participants dropped out (5.4%) due to administrative discontinuations
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk A protocol was found (NCT00704405) and all outcomes reported on
Vested‐interest bias High risk This study was sponsored and funded by Merck
Other bias Low risk The trial appeared to be free of other components that could put it at risk of bias