Table 3.
Overall quality judgment of each study assessed by the RoB 2 tool.
| Author | Overall Risk of Bias Judgment* | Main Sources of Bias |
|---|---|---|
| Balius et al. [36] | Some concerns | No placebo treatment Small study population No baseline comparison |
| Gumina et al. [34] | Some concerns (high) | No placebo treatment |
| Mavrogenis et al. [37] | Some concerns (high) | No intention-to-treat analyses Small study population with broad inclusion criteria Only participant-reported outcomes Short follow-up |
| Merolla et al. [35] | Some concerns | Mainly participant-reported outcomes No between-group comparison of change |
| Notarnicola et al. [38] | Low risk (some concerns) | No baseline characteristics presented |
| Praet et al. [39] | Some concerns (high) | No wash-out period Small study population Potential of selection bias |
| Saggini et al. [40] | High risk | Insufficient information about randomization, group comparison, protocol and analyses Incomplete and unclear reporting of results |
| Sandford et al. [41] | Low risk | |
| Szczurko et al. [28] | Some concerns | High drop-out rate Individual variability in the multiple components of the intervention delivered |
*Possible judgments are: Low risk, Some concerns, High risk