Efficacy of whole body vibration therapy on pain and functional ability in people with non-specific low back pain: a systematic review

Table 1 Level of evidence for the included studies

Clinical trail	Items on the PEDro scale											Total score	Level of quality
Clinical trail	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	Total score	Level of quality
1. Ruan et al. (2008) [24]	1	1	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	4	Fair
2. Pozo-Cruz et al. (2011) [25]	1	1	0	1	0	0	1	1	1	1	1	7	Good
3. Rittweger et al. (2002) [26]	1	1	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	4	Fair
4. Yang et al. (2015) [27]	1	1	0	1	0	0	0	1	0	1	1	5	Fair
5. Kaeding et al. (2017) [28]	0	1	0	1	0	0	0	1	1	1	1	6	Good
6. Wegener et al. (2019) [29]	1	1	0	1	0	0	0	0	0	1	1	4	Fair
7. Wang et al. (2019) [30]	1	1	1	1	0	0	1	1	1	1	1	8	Good

0: criterion not fulfilled; 1: criterion fulfilled
The items are listed as follows: 1: eligibility criteria were specified; 2: subjects were randomly allocated to groups or to a treatment order; 3: allocation was concealed; 4: the groups were similar at baseline; 5: there was blinding of all subjects; 6: there was blinding of all therapists; 7: there was blinding of all assessors; 8: measures of at least one key outcome were obtained from more than 85% of the subjects who were initially allocated to groups; 9: intention-to- treat analysis was performed on all subjects who received the treatment or control condition as allocated; 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;
Total score: each satisfied item (except the first) contributes 1 point to the total score, yielding a PEDro scale score that can range from 0 to 10
Level of evidence: 6–8 of “good” quality, 4–5 of “fair” quality, and below 4 of “poor” quality

ISSN: 2662-7671