Copyright
©2012 Baishideng Publishing Group Co.
World J Gastroenterol. Oct 21, 2012; 18(39): 5622-5631
Published online Oct 21, 2012. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i39.5622
Published online Oct 21, 2012. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v18.i39.5622
Table 3 Risk of bias in included trials
| Studies | Sequence generation | Allocation concealment | Blinding of participants and personnel | Blinding of outcome assessment | Incomplete outcome data | Selective reporting |
| Bretthauer et al[8] | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | High risk | High risk |
| Maple et al[12] | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | High risk | High risk |
| Dellon et al[9] | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk |
| Kuwatani et al[10] | Low risk | Unclear risk | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | High risk |
| Luigiano et al[11] | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | Low risk | High risk | High risk |
| Mei et al[13] | Unclear risk | Unclear risk | Low risk | Low risk | Unclear risk | Unclear risk |
| Arjunan et al[14] | Unclear risk | Unclear risk | Low risk | Low risk | Unclear risk | Unclear risk |
- Citation: Cheng Y, Xiong XZ, Wu SJ, Lu J, Lin YX, Cheng NS, Wu TX. Carbon dioxide insufflation for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: A meta-analysis and systematic review. World J Gastroenterol 2012; 18(39): 5622-5631
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1007-9327/full/v18/i39/5622.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v18.i39.5622