| Study characteristics |
| Methods |
Study design: RCT
Setting: Israel, healthcare
Exercise groups: 2
Comparison groups: 0 |
| Participants |
Number of participants: 52 (E1 = 26, E2 = 26)
Chronic LBP duration: Not specified (not specified)
Neurological/radicular symptoms: Some participants
Mean age (years): 45
Sex (female): 79% |
| Interventions |
Exercise Group 1 (E1): Active movements and strengthening exercises for the trunk and upper and lower limbs; type = strengthening; duration = 6 weeks; dose = low; design = standardised; delivery = group; additional intervention = not specified
Exercise Group 2 (E2): Walking (treadmill); type = aerobic; duration = 6 weeks; dose = low; design = partially individualised; delivery = group; additional intervention = not specified |
| Outcomes |
Core outcomes reported: Function (Oswestry Disability Index); HRQoL (36‐Item Short Form Survey)
Follow‐up time periods available for syntheses: 6 weeks (short) |
| Notes |
Conflicts of interest: Not reported
Funding source: No funding received
Other: Information modified for author contact |
| Risk of bias |
| Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) |
Low risk |
Block randomisation (four cells in each block) stratified by age groups (18–44 years, 45–65 years) were set up. |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) |
Low risk |
Assignment was concealed in sealed envelopes and was revealed by an independent researcher not involved in the
assessments or intervention. |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes |
High risk |
Assumed not possible |
| Blinding of care provider (performance bias) |
High risk |
Assumed not possible |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes |
Low risk |
Stated in paper that assessors were blinded |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes |
Low risk |
Six patients from the study group and three from the control group withdrew from the study (Figure 1). |
| Participants analysed in group allocated (attrition bias) |
Low risk |
All analyses were based on an intention‐to‐treat basis. |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) |
Low risk |
Support for judgement was not available. |
| Groups similar at baseline (selection bias) |
Low risk |
There were no statistically significant baseline differences in demographic or clinical parameters between the study groups. |
| Co‐interventions avoided or similar (performance bias) |
Unclear risk |
Author contact: not measured |
| Compliance acceptable in all groups (performance bias) |
Low risk |
No difference in average number of visits between groups |
| Timing of outcome assessment similar in all groups (detection bias) |
Low risk |
Support for judgement was not available. |
