Outcomes of platelet-rich plasma for plantar fasciopathy: a best-evidence synthesis

Table 2 The methodological quality of included RCTs

Author(Year)	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	Overall Quality
PRP Versus CS
Omar AS (2012) [32]	√	×	×	×	×	×	〇	〇	Low
Lee TG (2007) [33]	〇	×	×	×	×	×	〇	√	Low
Aksahin E (2012) [34]	√	〇	√	√	√	×	√	√	High
Carlos AO (2017) [35]	√	×	×	〇	×	×	〇	√	Low
Tiwari M (2013) [36]	√	×	×	×	×	×	〇	〇	Low
Monto RR (2014) [13]	√	×	×	×	〇	×	〇	√	Low
Jain K (2015) [37]	√	×	〇	×	√	〇	√	√	Moderate
Say F (2014) [38]	√	×	×	×	×	×	√	〇	Low
Sherpy NA (2016) [39]	√	〇	×	×	√	√	√	〇	Moderate
Vahdatpour B (2016) [40]	√	×	〇	×	×	×	〇	〇	Low
Jain SK (2018) [41]	√	√	√	〇	√	√	×	√	High
PRP Versus PL
Sarah JL (2019) [42]	√	〇	×	×	√	√	√	〇	Moderate
Mahindra P (2016) [43]	√	〇	√	√	×	√	√	√	High

A, adequate sequence generation; B, allocation concealment; C, blinding (participants); D, blinding (investigators); E, blinding (evaluators); F, incomplete outcome data inexistent or addressed; G, free of selective reporting; H, free of other bias
High, well-designed double-blind trials with proper allocation concealment and complete outcome data; Moderate: double-blind trials without proper allocation concealment or complete outcome data or single-blind trials; Low: trials without proper blinding methods applied.
The check mark (√), yes; cross mark (×), no; and circle (〇), unclear

ISSN: 1749-799X