From: The efficacy and safety of tranexamic acid in revision total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis
Quality assessment for non-randomized trials | Aguilera 2012 [10] | Ortega-Andreu 2016 [11] | Samujh 2014 [12] | Smit 2013 [13] |
---|---|---|---|---|
A clearly stated aim | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Inclusion of consecutive patients | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Prospective data collection | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Endpoints appropriate to the aim of the study | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Unbiased assessment of the study endpoint | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
A follow-up period appropriate to theaims of study | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Less than 5% loss to follow-up | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Prospective calculation of the sample size | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
An adequate control group | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Contemporary groups | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 |
Baseline equivalence of groups | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Adequate statistical analyses | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
Total score | 18 | 20 | 19 | 20 |