Copyright
©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Clin Cases. Mar 6, 2025; 13(7): 95004
Published online Mar 6, 2025. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v13.i7.95004
Published online Mar 6, 2025. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v13.i7.95004
Quality assessment criteria | Eggli et al[11], 1995 | Lucas et al[13], 2015 | Hupperich et al[14], 2018 | Hagmeijer et al[12], 2019 | Moon et al[15], 2020 |
Clearly stated aim | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Inclusion of consecutive patients | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 |
Prospective collection of data | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
Endpoints appropriate to the aim of the study | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Unbiased assessment of study endpoint | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Follow-up period appropriate to the aim of the study | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Loss to follow up less than 5% | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
Prospective calculation of study size | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Adequate control group | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Contemporary groups | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Baseline equivalence of groups | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Adequate statistical analysis | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
Total score | 10 | 11 | 12 | 9 | 18 |
- Citation: Javid K, Akins X, Lemaster NG, Ahmad A, Stone AV. Impact of time between meniscal injury and isolated meniscus repair on post-operative outcomes: A systematic review. World J Clin Cases 2025; 13(7): 95004
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2307-8960/full/v13/i7/95004.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v13.i7.95004