Table 3.
Methodological quality and risk of bias (PEDro Scores) of the studies included in the review.
| Items | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | TOTAL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Authorship | ||||||||||||
| Collado-Mateo, D. et al., 2017a [62] | N | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 7 |
| Collado-Mateo, D. et al., 2017b [64] | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | 7 |
| García-Palacios, A. et al., 2015 [65] | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 7 |
| Gulsen, C. et al., 2020 [66] | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | 6 |
| León-Llamas, J.L. et al., 2020 [67] | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 7 |
| Martín-Martínez, J.P. et al., 2019 [68] | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 7 |
| Polat, M. et al., 2021 [69] | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 7 |
| Silva de Carvalho, M. et al., 2020 [61] | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | 6 |
| Villafaina, S. et al., 2019a [63] | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 7 |
| Villafaina, S. et al., 2019b [70] | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | 6 |
| Villafaina, S. et al., 2019c [71] | Y | Y | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 6 |
Abbreviations: 1 = eligibility criteria, 2 = random allocation, 3 = concealed allocation, 4 = baseline comparability, 5 = blind subjects, 6 = blind therapists, 7 = blind assessors = 8, adequate follow-up, 9 = intention-to-treat analysis, 10 = between-group comparisons, 11 = point estimates and variability, Note = eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score, Y = Yes, N = No.