Skip to main content
. 2021 Dec 16;20:53. doi: 10.1186/s12991-021-00373-z
Study Question described Appropriate study design Appropriate subject selection Characteristics described Random allocation Researchers
Blinded		 Subject blinded Outcome measures well defined and robust to bias Sample size appropriate Analytic methods well described Estimate of variance reported Controlled for confounding Results reported in detail Conclusion
supported by results?		 Rating (%)
Klein et al. [47] 2 2 1 1 NA 0 0 2 1 2 2 1 2 2

Moderate

(64.3%)
Robins and Luten [69] 2 2 2 2 NA 0 0 1 1 2 1 1 2 2

Moderate

(64.3%)
Robins et al. [71] 2 2 2 2 NA 0 0 1 2 2 0 2 2 2

Moderate

(67.9%)
Desmet et al. [30] 2 2 2 2 NA 0 0 2 2 2 1 1 2 2

Moderate

(71.4%)
Luyten et al. [51] 2 2 2 2 NA 0 0 2 1 2 2 2 2 2

Strong

(75%)
Otani et al. [59] 2 2 1 2 NA 0 0 2 2 2 0 1 2 2

Moderate

(64.3%)
Straccamore et al. [79] 2 2 2 2 NA 0 0 2 1 2 1 2 2 2

Moderate

(71.4%)
Schachter and Zlotogorski [74] 2 2 1 1 NA 0 0 2 1 2 0 2 2 2

Moderate

(60.7%)
Besser et al. [11] 2 2 1 2 NA 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Strong

(75%)
Dorahy and Hanna [32] 2 2 1 2 NA 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Strong

(75%)
Burke and Haslam [19] 2 2 2 2 NA 0 0 2 1 2 1 2 2 2

Moderate

(71.4%)
Abi-Habib and Luyten [1] 2 2 1 2 NA 0 0 2 2 2 1 2 2 2

Moderate

(71.4%)
Silva et al. [76] 2 2 2 2 NA 0 0 2 2 2 0 1 2 2

Moderate

(67.9%)
Bar et al. [4] 2 2 1 2 NA 0 0 2 2 2 0 2 2 2

Moderate

(67.9%)
Fazaa and Page [36] 2 2 1 2 NA 0 0 2 2 1 2 1 1 2

Moderate

(64%)
Vanhuele and Desmet [80] 2 2 2 2 NA 0 0 2 2 1 2 1 1 2

Moderate

(67.9%)
Faaza and Page [37] 2 2 1 2 NA 0 0 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 Moderate (60%)
O’Riley and Fiske [57] 2 2 1 2 NA 0 0 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 Moderate (67.8%)
Campos and Holden [21] 2 1 1 2 NA 0 0 2 2 2 2 1 2 2

Moderate

(67.8%)
O’Keefe et al. [56] 2 2 1 2 NA 0 0 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 Moderate (67.8%)
Campos and Holden [22] 2 2 1 2 NA 0 0 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 Moderate (67.8%)
Park and Kim [60, 61] 2 2 1 2 NA 0 0 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 Moderate (71%)
Campos, Besser and Blatt [23] 2 1 1 2 NA 0 0 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 Moderate (67.8%)
Piper et al. [65] 2 2 2 2 NA 0 0 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 Strong (75%)
Bonanno et al. [16] 2 2 1 2 NA 0 0 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 Moderate (67.8%)
Denckla et al. [28] 2 2 1 1 NA 0 0 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 Moderate (64.2%)
Mancini et al. [52] 2 2 1 2 NA 0 0 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 Moderate (67.8%)

NA not applicable, 2 indicates yes, 1 indicates partial, 0 indicates no

Quality scores ≥ 75% strong, 56 ≥ 74% moderate, ≤ 55% weak