Copyright
©2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Inc.
World J Meta-Anal. Aug 26, 2014; 2(3): 78-90
Published online Aug 26, 2014. doi: 10.13105/wjma.v2.i3.78
Published online Aug 26, 2014. doi: 10.13105/wjma.v2.i3.78
Table 4 Methodological quality assessment of the randomized sham-controlled trials
Ref. | Random Sequence Generation | Allocation Concealment | Blinding of Participant | Blinding of Care Provider | Blinding of Assessor | Data Collection Complete | Complete Outcome Reporting | Free of Other Potential Bias | Risk of Bias1 |
Falconer et al[18] | Unclear | Unclear | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | High |
Ozgönenel et al[19] | Unclear | Unclear | Yes | No | Yes | Unclear | Yes | Yes | High |
Tascioglu et al[20] | Unclear | Unclear | Yes | No | Yes | Unclear | Yes | Yes | High |
Yang et al[21] | Unclear | Unclear | Unclear | Unclear | Unclear | Yes | No | No | High |
Loyola-Sánchez et al[22] | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Low |
Ulus et al[23] | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | High |
- Citation: MacIntyre NJ, Negm A, Loyola-Sánchez A, Bhandari M. Efficacy of therapeutic ultrasound vs sham ultrasound on pain and physical function in people with knee osteoarthritis: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. World J Meta-Anal 2014; 2(3): 78-90
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2308-3840/full/v2/i3/78.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.13105/wjma.v2.i3.78