Skip to main content

Table 2 Quality assessment of included studies using ROBINS-1 tool

From: What is the effectiveness of radiofrequency ablation in the management of patients with spinal metastases? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Study

Bias due to confounding

Bias in selection of participants into study

Bias in classification of interventions

Bias due to deviations from intended interventions

Bias due to missing data

Bias in measurement of outcomes

Bias in selection of the reported result

Overall risk of bias

Bagla et al. [17]

Serious

Low

Low

Low

Moderate

Serious

Low

Serious

Sayed et al. [18]

Serious

Low

Low

Low

Moderate

Serious

Low

Serious

Prezzano et al. [19]

Serious

Low

Low

Low

Low

Serious

Low

Serious

Tomasian et al. [20]

Serious

Low

Low

Low

Moderate

Low

Low

Serious

Zhao et al. [21]

Serious

Low

Low

Low

Low

Serious

Low

Serious

Cazzato et al. [22]

Serious

Moderate

Low

Low

Low

Serious

Low

Serious

Greenwood et al. [23]

Serious

Low

Low

Low

Low

Serious

Low

Serious

Anchala et al. [24]

Serious

Low

Low

Low

Moderate

Serious

Low

Serious

Gervagez et al. [25]

Serious

Low

Low

Low

Serious

Serious

Low

Serious

Wallace et al. [26]

Serious

Low

Low

Low

Low

Serious

Low

Serious

Zheng et al. [27]

Serious

Low

Low

Low

Low

Serious

Low

Serious

Proschek et al. [28]

Moderate

Low

Low

Low

Low

Serious

Low

Serious

Dabravolski et al. [29]

Serious

Low

Low

Low

Low

Serious

Low

Serious

Georgy et al. [30]

Serious

Low

Low

Low

Moderate

Serious

Low

Serious

Nakatsuka et al. [31]

Serious

Low

Low

Low

Low

Serious

Low

Serious

  1. All studies are found to have serious risk of bias overall which is particularly attributed to bias due to confounding and measurement of outcomes