Skip to main content
. 2020 Apr 22;6(1):e000683. doi: 10.1136/bmjsem-2019-000683

Table 2.

Downs and black methodological quality assessment results

Article reference
Criteria De Mey
et al53
Hardwick
et al54
Kaur
et al55
Kibler
et al56
Maenhout
et al57
Maenhout
et al58
Nagai
et al59
Nakamura
et al52
Smith
et al60
Tsuruike and Ellenbecker61 Uhl
et al62
Yamauchi
et al63
Criteria 1–10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Reporting 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
3 1 1 1 1 1 1 X 1 X X 1 X
4 1 1 1 1 X 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
5 (/2) X X X X X X X X X X X X
6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 X X 1 1 1
7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 X 1 1 1
8 X X 1 X X X X X X X X X
9 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 X X X 1
Criteria 11–13 11 UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD
External validity 12 UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD
13 UTD 1 UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD 1 UTD UTD UTD
Criteria 14–20 14 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Internal validity bias 15 UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD
16 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
17 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 UTD
18 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 UTD 1 1 1
19 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Criteria 21–26 21 1 1 UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD 1 1 1 1 UTD
Internal validity 22 UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD UTD
Selection bias 23 X X 1 X X X X X X X X X
24 X X X X X X X X X X X X
25 X X X X X X X X X X X X
26 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Criteria 27 27 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Modified power Total 16 18 18 15 14 15 14 15 12 14 15 13
% Agreement 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Quality grade Fair Fair Fair Fair Fair Fair Fair Fair Poor Fair Fair Poor

For article scoring: 1=score given; X=no score given. Inline graphic, items deemed less pertinent to the quality of investigatory EMG studies; Inline graphic, items deemed most pertinent to the quality of investigatory EMG studies.

EMG, electromyography; UTD, unable to determine.