Skip to main content

Table 2 Critical appraisal of included studies

From: The effect of tai chi and Qigong exercise on depression and anxiety of individuals with substance use disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Criteria

Study reference

Li 2002 [47]

Chen 2010 [48]

Li 2013 [49]

Huang 2015 [50]

Geng 2016 [51]

Fu 2016 [52]

Zhu 2018 [53]

1. Was the generation of allocation adequate?

N

N

U

U

U

N

Y

2. Was the treatment allocation concealed?

N

N

U

U

U

N

N

3. Were details of the intervention administered to each group made available?

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

4. Were care providers’ experience or skills in each arm appropriate?

U

N

U

U

U

U

U

5. Was participant (i.e., patients) adherence assessed quantitatively?

U

Y

U

U

N

U

U

6. Were participants adequately blinded? if no, go to point 6.1 and 6.2

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

6.1 Were other treatments and care (i.e. co-interventions) the same in each randomized group?

Y

N

Y

Y

U

U

Y

6.2 Were withdrawals and lost-to-follow-up the same in each randomized group?

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

7. Were care providers for the participants adequately blinded? if no, go to point 7.1 and 7.2

N

N

N

N

N

N

N

7.1 Were other treatments and care (i.e. co-interventions) the same in each randomized group?

Y

N

Y

Y

U

U

Y

7.2 Were withdrawals and lost-to-follow-up the same in each randomized group?

Y

N

Y

Y

Y

Y

N

8. Were outcome assessors adequately blinded to assess the primary outcomes? If no, go to 8.1

Y

N/A

Y

N/A

N/A

N/A

Y

8.1 If outcome assessors were not adequately blinded, were specific methods used to avoid ascertainment bias?

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

9. Was the follow-up schedule the same in each group? (parallel design)

U

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

10. Were the main outcomes analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle?

Y

N

N

N

N

Y

N

  1. Y Yes, N No, N/A Not appropriate, U Unable to determine