Skip to main content
. 2022 Aug 4;10:944636. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.944636

Table 2.

Methodological quality of the included studies.

References Score Methodological quality PEDro item number
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Sui (33) 5 Fair 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Li et al. (35) 5 Fair 1 1 1 1 1 1
Geng et al. (29) 5 Fair 1 1 1 1 1 1
Zhang and Zhu (38) 7 Good 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Wang (34) 6 Good 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Zhao (32) 8 Good 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Zheng (31) 6 Good 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Zhu et al. (36) 7 Good 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Fu et al. (37) 6 Good 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Zhu (30) 5 Fair 1 1 1 1 1 1

Studies were classified as having excellent (9–10), good (6–8), fair (4–5), or poor (<4).

The PEDro scale involves (1) eligibility criteria; (2) random allocation; (3) concealed allocation; (4) similarity at baseline on key measures; (5) participant blinding; (6) instructor blinding; (7) assessor blinding; (8) more than 85% retention rate of at least one outcome; (9) intention-to-treat analysis; (10) between-group statistical comparison for at least one outcome; (11) point estimates and measures of variability provided for at least one outcome.