Methodological scoring using the PEDro checklist and level of evidence of individual studies according to the CBO guidelines
| Study | Items | Methodological quality | Level of evidence | ||||||||||||
| 1* | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | Score** | ||||
| Eid et al21 | − | ? | ? | ? | − | − | − | − | + | − | − | 1/10 | Poor | B | |
| Lieberman and Breazeal22 | − | ? | ? | ? | + | ? | ? | + | + | + | + | 5/10 | Fair | B | |
| Sigrist et al26 | + | + | ? | + | ? | ? | ? | + | + | + | + | 6/10 | High | B | |
| Spelmezan et al29 | Study 1 | − | + | ? | + | + | ? | ? | ? | + | − | − | 3/10 | Poor | C |
| Study 2 | − | − | − | − | ? | ? | ? | + | + | + | + | 4/10 | Fair | C | |
| Study 3 | − | + | ? | − | ? | − | ? | + | + | + | + | 5/10 | Fair | B | |
| Van Erp et al28 | ? | + | ? | + | ? | ? | ? | + | + | + | + | 6/10 | High | B/A2 | |
| Spelmezan23 | − | + | ? | − | − | + | + | + | + | + | + | 7/10 | High | B | |
| Jansen et al24 | ? | − | − | + | ? | ? | ? | + | + | + | + | 5/10 | Fair | B | |
| van der Linden et al27 | − | − | ? | + | ? | ? | ? | + | + | + | + | 5/10 | Fair | B | |
| 25 | − | + | ? | + | ? | ? | ? | + | + | + | + | 6/10 | High | B | |
Scoring by the PEDro scale:
+ = Yes
− = No
? = Too little information or doubtable.
Legend:
1: Eligibility criteria were specified.
2: Subjects were randomly allocated to groups (in a crossover study, subjects were randomly allocated an order in which treatments were received).
3: Allocation was concealed.
4: The groups were similar at baseline regarding the most important prognostic indicators.
5: There was blinding of all subjects.
6: There was blinding of all therapists who administered the therapy.
7: There was blinding of all assessors who measured at least one key outcome.
8: Measures of at least one key outcome were obtained from more than 85% of the subjects initially allocated to groups.
9: All subjects for whom outcome measures were available received the treatment or control condition as allocated or, where this was not the case, data for at least one key outcome were analysed by ‘intention to treat.’
10: The results of between-group statistical comparisons are reported for at least one key outcome.
11: The study provides both point measures and measures of variability for at least one key outcome.
PEDro scores:
High quality = score 6–10
Fair quality = score 4–5
Poor quality = score ≤3
*Item 1 pertains for the external validity, thus is not considered for the final score.
**Poor quality = PEDro score ≤3.
CBO, Dutch Institute for Healthcare Improvement; PEDro, Physiotherapy Evidence Database.