Skip to main content
. 2019 Jul 12;7:190. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00190

Table 5.

Risk of bias assessment of randomized controlled studies on 100% fruit juice and dental health.

References Randomized Sequence generation Allocation concealment Blinding Analysis population Analysis approach Incomplete data Dropouts (%) Funding
EROSION
Dever et al. (21) nr nr nr nr Completers Paired t-test, adjusted for unequal variances. No other confounder adjustments reported nr 37.5% nr
West et al. (30) Yes nr nr Single ITT Paired non-parametric Wilcoxon,
No adjustments
n/a 0% Industry
Hughes et al. (31) Yes, balanced for residual effects nr nr Single ITT Paired t-test
No reported adjustments
n/a 0% nr
West et al. (32) Yes nr nr Single ITT Paired t-test
No reported adjustments
n/a 0% nr
Hughes et al. (33) Yes nr nr Single ITT ANOVA paired t-test between beverages subjects, period, treatment used in statistical models n/a 0% nr
Finke et al. (34) Yes, balanced for 1st order crossover effects nr nr Single nr 3-way ANOVA and multiple range test (Fisher's LSD) drinks, exposure time, volunteers used in statistical models nr nr Industry & Government Grant Funded
CARIES AND MINERALIZATION
Tenovuo and Rekola (35) nr nr nr nr ITT Student's t-test n/a 0% Industry
Jensen et al. (36) Yes nr nr nr nr ANOVA followed by Tukey's protected t-test
No reported adjustments
nr 20% nr
Issa et al. (37) Partial at lab site only nr nr Single at lab site nr Paired t-test, 1-way ANOVA, post-hoc Tukey's test for multiple comparisons
No reported adjustments
nr nr Industry

d, day; ITT, intent-to-treat; n/a, not applicable; nr, not reported.