Table 3.

Methodological quality assessment via PEDro scale.

Criteria *
Study Authors/Year	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	Score
Hansen, D. et al. [10] 2011	1	1	1	1	-	-	-	1	-	1	1	6/10
Caruso, F.R. et al. [11] 2015	1	1	1	1	-	-	-	1	1	1	1	7/10
Scheer, A. et al. [12] 2021	1	1	1	1	-	-	-	1	1	1	1	8/10
Reed, J.L. et al. [13] 2021	1	1	1	1	-	-	-	1	1	1	1	8/10
Marzolini, S. et al. [15] 2008	1	1	-	1	-	-	-	1	-	1	1	5/10
Santa-Clara H. et al. [16] 2002	1	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-	1	1	5/10
Kambic, T. et al. [17] 2021	1	1	1	1	-	-	-	1	-	1	1	7/10
Caruso, F.R. et al. [18] 2017	1	1	1	1	-	-	-	1	-	1	1	7/10
Vysoký, R. et al. [24] 2015	1	1	1	1	-	1	-	1	-	1	1	7/10
Ximenes, N.N. et al. [19] 2015	1	1	-	1	-	-	-	1	-	1	1	6/10
Deka, P. et al. [20] 2021	1	1	1	1	-	-	1	1	-	1	1	8/10
Arthur, H.M. et al. [21] 2007	1	1	1	1	-	1	-	1	1	1	1	9/10
Schmid, J.P. et al. [22] 2008	1	1	-	1	-	-	-	1	-	1	1	6/10
Pimenta, N.M. et al. [23] 2013	1	1	-	1	-	-	-	1	-	1	1	6/10

Criteria *—1. Specific eligibility requirements were followed 2. Subjects were randomly divided into groups. 3. The allocation was concealed. 4. The most crucial prognostic factors were identical across the groups at inception 5. All participants were blinded 6. All therapists who delivered the therapy were blinded 7. All assessors who measured at least one important outcome were blinded 8. More than 85% of the subjects who were initially divided into groups provided measurements of at least one major outcome 9. Analysis with the intention to treat 10. Comparison between groups 11. Study provides measures of variability. Each favorable outcome in a study receives a score of 1 on a scale from 0 to 10.