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 |