Table 3.
Quality assessment of experimental studies
| Authors (year) | Part A | Part B | Total and % of maximum score | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (1) Definition of prognosis |
(2) Manipulation of predictor |
(3) Blinded data analyst |
(4) Missing outcome data |
(5) Validated tools |
(6) Power and sample size |
(7) Non-response |
(8) Statistics |
(9) Randomisation |
(10) Allocation |
(11) Blinded patient |
(12) Group comparison |
(13) Equivalent conditions |
||
| Non-controlled experimental studies (within-subjects design) | ||||||||||||||
| Hagerty et al. (2005) | – | * | – | * | * | – | * | – | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | 4/8 = 50.0% |
| Kiely et al. (2013) | * | * | – | * | * | * | – | – | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | 5/8 = 62.5% |
| Mori et al. (2019) | * | * | – | * | * | * | – | * | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | 6/8 = 75.0% |
| Van Vliet et al. (2013) | * | * | – | * | * | * | – | * | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | 6/8 = 75.0% |
| Controlled experimental studies (between-subjects design) | ||||||||||||||
| Danzi et al. (2018) | – | * | – | * | – | – | – | * | * | * | * | * | * | 8/13 = 61.5% |
| Sep et al. (2014) | * | * | – | * | – | – | – | * | * | * | * | * | * | 9/13 = 69.2% |
A maximum of 1 point can be attained per item