Table 3.
Risk of bias assessment for randomised controlled trials comparing low dose oxygen supplementation with high dose oxygen supplementation
| Akca et al15 | Asfar et al22 | Barrot et al23 | Benoit et al26 | Lång et al24 | Panwar et al14 | Rothen et al8 | Staehr et al25 | |
| Random sequence generation |  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Allocation concealment |  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Blinding of participants and personal |  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Blinding of outcome assessment |  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Incomplete outcome data |  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Selective reporting |  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Other bias |  |
 |
 |
 |
Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias (Table 8.5.a in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Intervention).
Green, low risk of bias; Red, high risk of bias; Yellow, unclear risk of bias.