Table 4.
Assessment of the studies’ quality based on the CASP checklist.
| A1.Clearly Focused Question | A2. Use of Randomization Method | A3. Participants Accounted for | B4. Use of “Blinded” Methods | B5. Groups Similar at the Start of Randomization | B6. Each Study Group Received the Same Care | C7. Effects of Intervention Adequately Reported | C8. Precision Estimates Reported (CI or Other Effect Sizes) | C9. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Was Done | D10. Applicability of the Results | D11. Intervention Provides Value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Noorazar et al. (2020) | [69] | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (?) | (?) | (+) | (+) |
| 2. | Zamora et al. (2011) | [70] | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (?) | (?) | (+) | (+) |
| 3. | Arnold et al. (2011) | [71] | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (?) | (+) | (+) |
| 4. | Akhondzadeh et al. (2004) | [72] | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (?) | (?) | (+) | (+) |
| 5. | Bilici et al. (2004) | [73] | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (?) | (+) | (?) | (?) | (+) | (+) |
| 6. | Konofal et al. (2008) | [74] | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (?) | (+) | (+) |
| 7. | Panahandeh et al. (2017) | [75] | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (?) | (?) | (+) | (+) |
| 8. | Rucklidge et al. (2018) | [76] | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (?) | (+) | (+) |
| 9. | Rucklidge et al. (2021) | [58] | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (+) | (?) | (+) | (+) |
Note. (+) Green color cell: present-reported; (?) White color cell: not present or not reported. Items A1 to A3: the study design is valid for a randomized controlled trial. Items B4 to B6: the study methodology is sound. Items C7 to C9: the results are adequately reported. Items D10 to D11: the interpretation of the results is helpful.