Skip to main content

Table 1 Quality assessment summary (see Additional files  2  and  5  for item decision rules and scores for each included study)

From: Comparing lumbo-pelvic kinematics in people with and without back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  Quality assessment domains Percentage of studies scoring yes
  Selection bias  
1. Was the study population adequately described? 57%
2. Where both groups drawn from the same population? 39%
3. Were both groups comparable for age, sex, BMI/weight 54%
4. Was pain intensity and/or activity limitation described for LBP group? 56%
5. Was an attempt made to define back pain characteristics? 34%
  Measurement and outcome bias  
6. Did the method description enable accurate replication of the measurement procedures 90%
7. Was the measurement instrument adequately described? 95%
8. Was a system for standardising movement instructions reported? 37%
9. Were assessors trained in standardised measurement procedure? 2%
10. Did the same assessors test those with and without back pain 17%
11. Were assessors blinded as to which group subjects were in? 0%
12. Was the same assessment procedure applied to those with and without back pain? 93%
  Data presentation  
13. Were between-group statistical comparisons reported for at least one key outcome 94%