Management of post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms by yoga: an overview

Table 2 Methodological quality assessment

AMSTAR 2 criterion^a	USE PICO	METHOD	INCLUSION	SEARCH STRATEGY	SELECTION × 2	EXTRACTION × 2	EXCLUSIONS	DESCRIPTION	ROB RCT
Systematic review	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
Niles, 2018 [31]	Y	P	Y	P	N	N	N	P	N
Rosenbaum 2015 [3]	Y	P	N	P	Y	N	N	P	P
Cramer 2018 [25]	Y	P	N	P	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y
Hilton 2017 [27]	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	N	Y	Y
Gallegos 2017 [26]	Y	P	Y	P	Y	Y	N	Y	Y
Sciarrino 2017 [32]	Y	N	Y	P	N	N	N	P	N
Kysar- Moon 2021 [28]	Y	N	Y	P	N	N	N	Y	N
Björkman 2021 [24]	Y	P	N	P	Y	N	N	P	P
Liu 2018 [30]	Y	P	N	P	N	N	N	P	P
Bisson 2020^b [23]	Y	P	Y	Y	N	Y	N	N	Y
Zhu 2021 [29]	Y	Y	N	P	Y	N	N	Y	P
% of "No"	0	18	45	0	45	63	91	9	27

AMSTAR 2 criterion^a	FUNDING	MA METHOD	MA ROB IN RESULTS	ROB DISCUSSION	HETEROGENEITY	MA ROB DISCUTED	COI & FUNDINGS		Overall confidence in the results of the reviews
Systematic review	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	Rating (/16)	Overall confidence in the results of the reviews
Niles, 2018 [31]	N	n.a	n.a	N	N	n.a	Y	3	Critically low
Rosenbaum 2015 [3]	N	N	N	N	Y	Y	N	5	Critically low
Cramer 2018 [25]	N	Y	Y	Y	N	Y	Y	11	Moderate
Hilton 2017 [27]	N	Y	Y	N	Y	N	Y	12	Low
Gallegos 2017 [26]	N	N	N	Y	Y	Y	Y	11	Low
Sciarrino 2017 [32]	N	n.a	n.a	N	N	n.a	Y	3	Critically low
Kysar- Moon 2021 [28]	N	Y	N	N	Y	N	Y	6	Critically low
Björkman 2021 [24]	N	Y	Y	N	Y	Y	Y	7	Critically low
Liu 2018 [30]	N	n.a	n.a	Y	N	n.a	N	2	Critically low
Bisson 2020^b [23]	N	N	Y	Y	N	N	Y	8	Critically low
Zhu 2021 [29]	N	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y	N	9	Low
% of "No"	100	9	27	54	45	27	27	Mean score = 7

^aItems 9 and 11 are presented without 9.1/9.2 and 11.1/11.2 distinction as there is only RCT in this overview
^bData available in previous publications [7, 35, 36]
°AMSTAR 2 critical domains, Y Yes, P Partially yes, N No, n.a not applicable
Rating overall confidence in the results of the review:
High: No or one non-critical weakness. The systematic review provides an accurate and comprehensive summary of the results of the available studies that address the question of interest
Moderate: more than one non-critical weakness. The systematic review has more than one weakness but no critical flaws. It may provide an accurate summary of the results of the available studies that were included in the review
Low: one critical flaw with or without non-critical weaknesses. The review has a critical flaw and may not provide an accurate and comprehensive summary of the available studies that address the question of interest
Critically low: more than one critical flaw with or without non-critical weaknesses. The review has more than one critical flaw and should not be relied on to provide an accurate and comprehensive summary of the available studies

ISSN: 2662-7671