Associations between spinal flexibility and bracing outcomes in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a literature review

Table 2 The results of the quality assessment using the QUIPS tool

	Bias of domains
References	Study participation	Study attrition	Prognostic factor measurement	Outcome measurement	Study confounding	Statistical analysis and reporting	Score	Risk of bias	Quality
Cheung [30]	2	1	2	2	2	2	11	Moderate	Moderate
Cheung [14]	2	2	2	2	2	2	12	Low	High
He [15]	2	2	2	2	2	2	12	Low	High
He [33]	2	0	1	2	2	1	10	High	Low
Ohrt-Nissen [31]	2	1	2	2	2	2	11	Moderate	Moderate
Ohrt-Nissen [32]	2	2	2	2	2	1	11	Moderate	Moderate
Wong [28]	2	2	2	2	2	2	12	Low	High
Kuroki [34]	2	0	2	2	2	1	9	High	Low
Cheung [6]	2	2	2	2	2	2	12	Low	High
Kawasaki [36]	2	1	2	2	2	1	10	High	Low
Strube [17]	2	2	1	2	1	1	9	High	Low
Falbo [16]	2	2	1	2	2	1	10	High	Low
Kwan [29]	2	2	2	2	2	2	12	Low	High
Kuroki [35]	2	2	2	1	2	1	10	High	Low

Study participation: The key sample represents the population of interest on key characteristics, sufficient to limit potential bias to the results
Study attrition: Loss to follow-up (from sample to study population) is not associated with key characteristics, sufficient to limit potential bias (i.e., the study data adequately represent the sample)
Prognostic factor measurement: The prognostic factor of interest is adequately measured in study participants to sufficiently limit potential bias
Outcome measurement: The outcomes of interest are adequately measured in study participants to sufficiently limit potential bias
Study confounding: Important potential confounders are appropriately accounted for, limiting potential bias with respect to the prognostic factor of interest
Statistical analysis and reporting: The statistical analysis is appropriate for the design of the study, limiting potential for presentation of invalid results

ISSN: 1749-799X