Intensive follow-up vs conventional follow-up for patients with non-metastatic colorectal cancer treated with curative intent: A meta-analysis

Table 2 The methodological quality assessment of included trials

Ref.	Random sequence generation	Allocation concealment	Blinding of participants and personnel	Blinding of outcome assessment	Incomplete outcome data	Selective reporting	Other bias
Mäkelä et al[23], 1995	Unclear	Unclear	Low risk	Unclear	Low risk	Unclear	Unclear
Ohlsson et al[24], 1995	Unclear	Unclear	Low risk	Unclear	Low risk	Unclear	Unclear
Kjeldsen et al[25], 1997	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear	High risk	Low risk	Unclear	Unclear
Pietra et al[26], 1998	Unclear	Unclear	Low risk	Unclear	High risk	Unclear	Unclear
Schoemaker et al[27], 1998	Low risk	High risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Unclear	Unclear
Secco et al[28], 2002	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear	Low risk	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear
Rodríguez-Moranta et al[29], 2006	Low risk	Low risk	Unclear	Unclear	Low risk	Unclear	Unclear
Wattchow et al[30], 2006	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Unclear	Unclear
Sobhani et al[31], 2008	Unclear	Unclear	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Unclear	Unclear
Wang et al[32], 2009	Unclear	Unclear	High risk	High risk	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear
Strand et al[33], 2011	Unclear	Unclear	Low risk	Low risk	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear
Augestad et al[34], 2013	Unclear	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Unclear	Unclear
Primrose et al[35], 2014	Low risk	Low risk	Unclear	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Unclear
Treasure et al[36], 2014	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Unclear	Low risk	Low risk
Rosati et al[37], 2016	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear	Low risk	Unclear	Unclear
Wille-Jørgensen et al[38], 2018	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Low risk	Unclear	Low risk	Low risk
Rahr et al[39], 2019	Low risk	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear	Low risk	Unclear	Unclear
Monteil et al[40], 2021	Unclear	Unclear	Unclear	Low risk	Low risk	Unclear	Unclear