Hemmati 2011.
| Methods | Randomised controlled trial | |
| Participants | 24 women were included (12 experimental and 12 control). All participants were from a convenience sample of friends and family. | |
| Interventions | Motor control exercise versus no treatment | |
| Outcomes | Pain (NRS 0 to 10) Disability (Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)) |
|
| Notes | Data were extracted by a Persian translator | |
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Adequate random sequence generation used |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Not mentioned |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | High risk | No mention of any attempts to blind the participants |
| Blinding of personnel/care provider (performance bias) All outcomes | High risk | No mention of any attempts to blind the care provider |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | No mention of any attempts to blind the assessor |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | There is no mention of loss to follow‐up or how many were included at the follow‐up |
| Intention‐to‐treat analysis | Unclear risk | No mention of intention‐to‐treat analysis |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | No previous protocol or trial registration, but it was clear that the published report included all expected outcomes |
| Group similarity at baseline (selection bias) | Low risk | Patients did not differ in their baseline characteristics |
| Co‐interventions (performance bias) | Unclear risk | Not mentioned |
| Compliance (performance bias) | Unclear risk | Not mentioned |
| Timing of outcome assessment (detection bias) | Unclear risk | Not mentioned |