Methods |
For characteristics see Silva 2013a1
|
Participants |
|
Interventions |
|
Outcomes |
|
Notes |
|
Risk of bias |
Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) |
Low risk |
computer‐generated random code provided by the sponsor (Schering‐Plough Research Institute) |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) |
Unclear risk |
Not described |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes |
Low risk |
The study was described as double‐blinded, (Active drug and matched placebo cap‐sules were used to maintain third‐party blind dispensing) |
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 |
Only 1 participant dropped out due to AE |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) |
Unclear risk |
Protocol not found |
Vested‐interest bias |
High risk |
This study was supported by Merck & Co. Inc. |
Other bias |
Low risk |
The trial appeared to be free of other components that could put it at risk of bias |