Skip to main content
. 2011 Nov 9;2011(11):CD002199. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002199.pub4

Filingeri 2005.

Methods RCT
Participants CAF
Interventions Open (20) vs. Closed using RFA (20) internal sphincterotomy
Outcomes Healing
Notes 5 drop outs not analysed as ITT 
 All healed at 30 d
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk specified and adequate randomisation method
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk adequate
Drop‐outs 
 All outcomes High risk 5/40 = 12.5%