Study |
Bias |
Randomisation process |
Deviations from intended interventions |
Missing outcome data |
Measurement of the outcome |
Selection of the reported results |
Overall |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
Zmora 2003 |
Low risk of bias |
The generation of the randomisation sequence and the allocation concealment were appropriate. There was no baseline imbalance that would indicate a problem with randomisation. |
Low risk of bias |
Both participants and those delivering the intervention were aware of intervention received. There were no deviations from intervention. |
Low risk of bias |
92% of the 415 randomised patients were analysed.
Twenty‐nine patients were excluded after randomization due to the intraoperative exclusion criteria (18 had abdominoperineal resection and
11 had a proximal stoma). Six patients withdrew their consent before surgery, leaving 380 patients for the data analysis. |
Low risk of bias |
The assessors were not blinded, but it is not possible that knowledge of the intervention would have influenced the assessment, as death cannot be misdiagnosed. |
Some concerns |
No pre‐registered method (registry or protocol) available. |
Some concerns |
Some concerns due to the lack of information about a predefined analysis plan. |
Ram 2005 |
Low risk of bias |
The generation of the randomisation sequence and the allocation concealment were appropriate. There was no baseline imbalance that would indicate a problem with randomisation. |
Low risk of bias |
Both participants and those delivering the intervention were aware of intervention received. There were no deviations from intervention. |
Low risk of bias |
All participants were included in the analysis. |
Low risk of bias |
The assessors were not blinded, but it is not possible that knowledge of the intervention would have influenced the assessment, as death cannot be misdiagnosed. |
Some concerns |
No pre‐registered method (registry or protocol) available. |
Some concerns |
Some concerns due to the lack of information about a predefined analysis plan. |