Skip to main content

Table 5 Methodological quality appraisal

From: Biomechanical risk factors associated with iliotibial band syndrome in runners: a systematic review

   Orchard et al. [7] Meisser et al. [8] Noehren et al. [11] Ferber et al. [12] Phinyomark et al. [20] Foch et al. [21] Foch and Milner [22] Foch and Milner [23] Grau et al.. [24] Hein et al. [25] Miller at al. [26]a Miller et al. [27]a Noehren et al. [28]
1 The purpose of the study was clearly stated + + + + + + + + + + + + +
2 The study design was appropriate + + + + + + + + + + + + +
3 The study detected sample biases (No adds to the total score) + + + + + + + + + + + + +
4 Measurement biases were detected in the study (No adds to the total score) + + + + + + + + + + + + +
5 The sample size was stated + + + + + + + + + + + + +
6 The sample was described in detail + + + + + + + + + + + + +
7 The sample size was justified - - + + - + - + - - - - +
8 The outcomes were clearly stated and relevant to the study + + + + + + + + + + + + +
9 The method of measurement was described sufficiently + + + + + - + + + + + + +
10 The measures used were reliable - - - - - - - - - - - - -
11 The measures used were valid - - - - - - - - - - - - -
12 The results were reported in terms of statistical significance + + + + + + + + + + + + +
13 The analysis methods used were appropriate + + - + + + + + + + + + +
14 Clinical importance was reported + + + + + + - - + - + + +
15 Missing data was reported where appropriate - - + - - - - - + - - - -
16 Conclusions were relevant and appropriate given the methods and results of the study + + - + + + + + + + + + +
  Study Results              
  Total CAT score /16 10 10 10 11 10 10 9 10 11 9 10 10 11
  Total CAT % 62.50 62.50 62.50 68.75 62.50 65.20 56.25 62.50 68.75 56.25 62.50 62.50 68.75
  1. Abbreviations: CAT Critical appraisal tool
  2. a study conducted on runners who ran to fatigue