Table 3.

PEDro scores of included studies.

Study	Inclusion criteria	Random allocation	Allocation concealment	Similar to the baseline	Participants blind	Therapists blind	Assessors blind	85% of follow-up	Intentionality analysis	Comparison between groups	Measured value	Total score 10
Bestall 2003[20]	Yes	1	1	1	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	5
Wadell 2004[36]	Yes	0	0	1	0	0	0	1	1	1	1	5
Puente-Maestu 2006[21]	Yes	0	0	1	0	0	0	1	0	1	1	4
Lotshaw 2007[31]	Yes	0	0	1	0	0	0	1	0	1	1	4
Ozdemir2010[30]	Yes	1	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	4
de Souto Araujo 2012[34]	Yes	1	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	4
Leung 2012[27]	Yes	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	0	1	1	7
Casey 2013[22]	Yes	1	1	1	0	0	1	0	1	1	1	7
McNamara 2013[37]	Yes	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	0	1	1	7
Wootton 2014[23]	Yes	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	1	1	1	8
Tsai 2017[24]	Yes	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	1	1	1	8
Daabis 2017[25]	Yes	1	0	1	0	0	0	1	0	1	1	5
Wootton 2017[26]	Yes	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	1	1	1	8
Li 2018[28]	Yes	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	0	1	1	7
Wu 2018[35]	Yes	1	1	1	1	0	0	1	0	1	1	7
Felcar 2018[32]	Yes	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	0	1	1	7
de Castro 2019[33]	Yes	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	0	1	1	7
Gallo-silva 2019[29]	Yes	1	1	1	1	0	0	1	0	1	1	7

1: Meets the PEDro scoring criteria; 0: not meet the PEDro scoring criteria.