Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 Sep 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Telemed Telecare. 2020 Sep 20;28(8):547–558. doi: 10.1177/1357633X20955122

Table 2.

Summary of quality appraisal using the PEDro scale.

Author Year Eligibility criteria were specified Subjects were randomly allocated to groups Allocation was concealed Groups were similar at baseline regarding the most important prognostic indicators Blinding of all subjects Blinding of all therapists who administered the therapy Blinding of all assessors who measured at least one key outcome Measures of at least one key outcome were obtained from more than 85% of the subjects initially allocated to groups All subjects for whom outcome measures were available received the treatment or control condition as allocated or, where this was not the case, data for at least one key outcome was analysed by ‘intention to treat’ Results of between-group statistical comparisons are reported for at least one key outcome Study provides both point measures and measures of variability for at least one key outcome Total
Boele 2018 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 6
Bromberg 2011 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 6
Conroy 2018 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 5
Dilorio 2011 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 4
Gahari 2010 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 5
Kannan 2019 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 5
Knoop 2008 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 6
Raina 2016 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 5
Houlihan 2017 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 7
anse 2016 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 7
Moss-Morris 2012 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 5
Sajatovic 2018 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 6
Sorbi 2015 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 7
Thompson 2019 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 6
Tiejen 2018 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 5
Van Kessel 2016 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 7

1: yes; 0: no or unclear.

PEDro: Physiotherapy Evidence Database