Skip to main content

Table 2 Methodological quality of the 11 treatment groups

From: Physical therapy treatments for low back pain in children and adolescents: a meta-analysis

Article (8)

TG (11)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Total

Ahlqwist et al. [30]

a

1

0

1

1

1

0

1

0

5

 

b

1

0

1

1

1

0

1

0

5

Clifford. [51]

a

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

5

 

b

0

0

0.5

1

1

1

1

0

4.5

 

c

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

0

4

Fanucchi et al. [31]

a

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

6

Fernandes et al. [50]

a

0

0

1

1

1

0

1

0

4

Harringe et al. [47]

a

0

0

1

0.833

0

0

1

0

2.833

Jones et al. [29]

a

0.5

0

1

0.871

0

0

1

0

3.371

Perich et al. [49]

a

0

0

1

1

1

0

1

0

4

Thorpe et al. [48]

a

0

1

0.5

0.588

0

0

1

0

3.088

  1. TG: Treatment group; 1: Random assignment; 1: the subjects were randomly assigned to the experimental conditions; 0.5: there was no random assignment but some method was applied to control confounding variables; 0: there was neither random assignment nor control of confounding variables. 2: Type of control group; 1: active control; 0: inactive control or no control group in the design. 3: Sample size in the posttest; 1: N ≥ 15 subjects; 0.5: 8 ≤ N < 14; 0: N < 8. 4: Attrition; this is computed as 1 – attrition in the posttest. 5: Intent-to-treat analysis; 1: present; 0: absent. 6. Evaluator blinding; 1: present; 0: absent. 7: Homogeneous assessment; 1: present; 0: absent. 8: Inter-rater reliability; 1: present; 0: absent.