Skip to main content

Table 2 The methodological quality of the included studies

From: Which is the best repair of articular-sided rotator cuff tears: a meta-analysis

Item Deutsch 2007 Kim 2013 Franceschi 2013 Kim 2013 Duralde 2012 Shin 2012 Seo 2011 Iyengar 2010 Castricini 2009
1) Is the hypothesis/aim/objective of the study clearly described? Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
2) Are the main outcomes to be measured clearly described in the Introduction or Method’s section? Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
3) Are the characteristics of the patients included in the study clearly described? Y Y Y Y N Y N Y N
4) Are the interventions of interest clearly described? N Y Y N N Y N N N
5) Are the distributions of principal confounders in each group of subjects to be compared clearly described? N N N N N N N N N
6) Are the main findings of the study clearly described? Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
7) Does the study provide estimates of the random variability in the data for the main outcomes? N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
8) Have all important adverse events that may be a consequence of the intervention been reported? N N N N N N N N N
9) Have the characteristics of patients lost to follow-up been described? Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
10) Have actual probability values been reported (e.g., 0.035 rather than <0.05) for the main outcomes except where the probability value is less than 0.001? Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
11) Were the subjects asked to participate in the study representative of the entire population from which they were recruited? U U U U U U U U U
12) Were those subjects who were prepared to participate representative of the entire population from which they were recruited? U U U U U U U U U
13) Were the staff, places, and facilities where the patients were treated representative of the treatment the majority of patients receive? U U U U U U U U U
14) Was an attempt made to blind study subjects to the intervention they have received? N N U N N U N N N
15) Was an attempt made to blind those measuring the main outcomes of the intervention? N N Y N N Y N N N
16) If any of the results of the study were based on “data dredging”, was this made clear? Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
17) In trials and cohort studies, do the analyses adjust for different lengths of follow-up of patients, or in case–control studies, is the time period between the intervention and outcome the same for cases and controls? N Y N N N N Y N N
18) Were the statistical tests used to assess the main outcomes appropriate? Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
19) Was compliance with the intervention/s reliable? Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
20) Were the main outcome measures used accurate (valid and reliable)? Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y
21) Were the patients in different intervention groups (trials and cohort studies) or were the cases and controls (case–control studies) recruited from the same population? N Y Y N N Y N N N
22) Were study subjects in different intervention groups (trials and cohort studies) or were the cases and controls (case–control studies) recruited over the same period of time? N Y Y N N Y N N N
23) Were study subjects randomized to intervention groups? N N Y N N Y N N N
24) Was the randomized intervention assignment concealed from both patients and health care staff until recruitment was complete and irrevocable? N N U N N U N N N
25) Was there adequate adjustment for confounding in the analyses from which the main findings were drawn? N N N N N N N N N
26) Were losses of patients to follow-up taken into account? N N N N N Y Y Y N
27) Did the study have sufficient power to detect a clinically important effect where the probability value for a different being due to chance is less than 5 %? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Score 10 15 16 11 10 17 12 12 10
  1. Y yes, N No, U unable to determine