Table 2.
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | Total | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Tough et al., 2010 [26] | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | 8/10 |
Sterling et al., 2015 [27] | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 9/10 |
Cerezo-Tellez et al., 2016 [29] | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | 6/10 |
Cerezo-Tellez et al., 2016 [30] | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | 6/10 |
León-Hernández et al., 2016 [24] | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 7/10 |
Gallego-Sendarrubias et al., 2020 [28] | Y | N | Y | Y | N | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 6/10 |
Stieven et al., 2020 [31] | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 8/10 |
Valiente-Castrillo et al., 2020 [25] | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 7/10 |
1, random allocation of participants; 2, concealed allocation; 3, similarity between groups at baseline; 4, participant blinding; 5, therapist blinding; 6, assessor blinding; 7, fewer than 15% dropouts; 8, intention-to-treat analysis; 9, between-group statistical comparisons; 10, point measures and variability data.