Table 2.
RoB 2.0 | Schmoll [13] | Brøndsted [30] | Brøndsted [29] | Zambrowski [31] |
---|---|---|---|---|
RCT | RCT | RCT | RCT | |
Randomization process | Some concerns | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk |
Deviation from intended interventionsa | Some concerns | Some concerns | Some concerns | Low risk |
Missing outcome data | High risk | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk |
Measurement of the outcome | Some concerns | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk |
Selection of the reported result | Some concerns | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk |
Overall | High risk | Some concerns | Some concerns | Low risk |
ROBIN-I | Alexander [14] | Ayaki [32] | Feng [15] | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Cohort | Cohort | NRS | ||
Confounding | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate | – |
Selection of participants into study | Low | Low | Moderate | – |
Classification of intervention | Low | Low | Low | – |
Deviations from intended intervention | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate | – |
Missing data | Low | Low | Moderate | – |
Measurement of outcomes | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate | – |
Selection of reported results | Moderate | Moderate | Moderate | – |
aEffect adhering to intervention.