Table 3.
Assessment of the risk of bias of the Korean and AB-GEN randomized controlled trials.
| Bias | Korea Study [24] | AB-GEN Study [23] |
|---|---|---|
| Sequence generation (selection bias) |
Low: | Low: |
| “Randomization was stratified by study center with a 1:1 ratio for PGx and TAU group, with the use of a random list generated by a computer” | “Randomization was stratified by center with a 1:1 ratio for intervention and control group, using a computer-generated random list” | |
| Location concealment (selection bias) |
Low: | Low: |
| Randomization list created at an independent center | Randomization list created at an independent center | |
| Blinding of participants and researchers (performance bias) |
High: | High: |
| Patients blinded | Patients blinded | |
| Treating clinician unblinded | Treating clinician unblinded | |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) |
High: | High: |
| CGI-S and HDRS-17 evaluated by the unblinded treating clinician | CGI-S and HDRS-17 evaluated by the unblinded treating clinician | |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) |
Low: | Low: |
| Patients lost to follow-up were evenly distributed | Patients lost to follow-up were evenly distributed | |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) |
Low: | Low: |
| Prespecified outcomes were reported | Prespecified outcomes were reported | |
| Other sources of bias | High: | High: |
| Patients recruited by the treating clinician | Patients recruited by the treating clinician | |
| Non-industry sponsored | Industry sponsored |