Copyright
©The Author(s) 2015.
World J Meta-Anal. Feb 26, 2015; 3(1): 61-71
Published online Feb 26, 2015. doi: 10.13105/wjma.v3.i1.61
Published online Feb 26, 2015. doi: 10.13105/wjma.v3.i1.61
Item assessed | Response | Score |
Was the study described as randomized? | Yes | 1 |
No | 0 | |
Was the method of randomization appropriate? | Yes | 1 |
No | -1 | |
Not described | 0 | |
Was the study described as blinded?1 | Yes | 1 |
No | 0 | |
Was the method of blinding appropriate? | Yes | 1 |
No | -1 | |
Not described | 0 | |
Was there a description of withdrawals and dropouts? | Yes | 1 |
No | 0 | |
Was there a clear description of the inclusion/exclusion criteria? | Yes | 1 |
No | 0 | |
Was the method used to assess adverse effects described? | Yes | 1 |
No | 0 | |
Was the method of statistical analysis described? | Yes | 1 |
No | 0 |
-
Citation: Jiang N, Song HJ, Xie GP, Wang L, Liang CX, Qin CH, Yu B. Operative
vs nonoperative treatment of displaced intra-articular calcaneal fracture: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. World J Meta-Anal 2015; 3(1): 61-71 - URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2308-3840/full/v3/i1/61.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.13105/wjma.v3.i1.61