Table 3

Quality assessment of the included investigations

Authors and year123456789101112Total score
Baez et al4322211220NANANANA12/16
Barchek et al4422221221NANANANA14/16
Bell et al3522220222211220/24
Davis-Wilson et al4522121212NANANANA13/16
Ezzat et al3622222221212222/24
Kuenze et al3712220222222120/24
Kuenze et al3822120211212218/24
Kuenze et al4622220221NANANANA13/16
Kuenze et al4222210211NANANANA11/16
Lisee et al3921211211222118/24
Toomy et al4021220211211217/24
Triplett and Kuenze4122211101221116/24
  • All items are scored 0 (not reported), 1 (reported but inadequate) and 2 (reported and adequate). The maximum score for non-comparative studies is 16 and the maximum score for comparative studies is 24. 1, a clearly stated aim; 2, inclusion of consecutive patients; 3, prospective collection of data; 4, endpoints appropriate to the aim of the study; 5, unbiased assessment of the study endpoint; 6, follow-up period appropriate to the aim of the study; 7, loss to follow-up less than 5%; 8, prospective calculation of the study size; 9, an adequate control group; 10, contemporary groups; 11, baseline equivalence of groups; 12, adequate statistical analyses.

  • NA, not applicable.