Table 1.
Methodological quality of the included studies (PEDro criteria).
| References | Total score (0–10) | Methodological quality | Eligibility criteria | Random allocation | Concealed allocation | Baseline comparability | Blind subject | Blind therapist | Blind assessor | Adequate follow-up | Intention- to-treat analysis |
Between-group comparisons | Point estimates and variability reported |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mayr et al. (31) | 5/10 | Acceptable | X | X | X | X | X | ||||||
| Hornby et al. (32) | 5/10 | Acceptable | X | X | X | X | X | X | |||||
| Hidler et al. (33) | 5/10 | Acceptable | X | X | X | X | X | X | |||||
| Westlake and Patten (34) | 6/10 | Good | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
| Uçar et al. (35) | 4/10 | Poor | X | X | X | X | |||||||
| Van Nunen et al. (36) | 4/10 | Poor | X | X | X | X | X | ||||||
| Bang et al. (37) | 7/10 | Good | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | |||
| Bergmann et al. (38) | 6/10 | Good | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
| Belas Dos Santos et al. (39) | 5/10 | Acceptable | X | X | X | X | X | X | |||||
| Mayr et al. (40) | 7/10 | Good | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | ||||
| Mustafaoglu et al. (41) | 7/10 | Good | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | |||
| Park et al. (42) | 5/10 | Acceptable | X | X | X | X | X | X | |||||
| Yun et al. (43) | 6/10 | Good | X | X | X | X | X | X | X |