Table 5. Results from the quality appraisal of therapeutic investigations using the Down’s and Black Checklist.
Quality of Evidence Assessment–Therapeutic Investigations.
| Study | Reporting | External Validity | Internal Validity (Bias) | Internal Validity (Selection Bias) | Power | Quality Score | Percentage | Evidence Category |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hofstoetter et al., 2013 [6] | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 9% | Poor |
| Gerasimenko et al., 2015 [67] | 4 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 19% | Poor |
| Hofstoetter et al., 2015 [18] | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 12% | Poor |
| Bedi, 2016 [68] | 4 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 22% | Poor |
| Minassian et al., 2016 [19] | 5 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 28% | Poor |
| Gad et al., 2017 [41] | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 9% | Poor |
| Freyvert et al., 2018 [44] | 7 | 0 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 14 | 44% | Poor |
| Gad et al., 2018 [43] | 9 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 34% | Poor |
| Inanici et al., 2018 [36] | 5 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 9 | 28% | Poor |
| Rath et al., 2018 [37] | 7 | 0 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 12 | 37% | Poor |
| Sayenko et al., 2019 [42] | 6 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 17 | 53% | Fair |
| Al’Joboori et al., 2020 [69] | 8 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 15 | 47% | Poor |
| Alam et al., 2020 [40] | 3 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 9 | 28% | Poor |
| Meyer et al., 2020 [70] | 8 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 16 | 50% | Poor |
| Shapkova et al., 2020 [38] | 8 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 3 | 17 | 53% | Fair |
| Zhang et al., 2020 [71] | 5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 25% | Poor |
| Total Maximum Score | /11 | /3 | /7 | /6 | /5 | /32 | /100% |