Table 1. Assessment of methodological quality of included studies.
Bredeweget al. 2012 Brushojet al. 2008 Van Mechelenet al. 1993 Popeet al. 1998 Pope,et al. 2000 Rudzki1997 Buistet al. 2008
1. Eligibility criteria were specified 1 0 1 0 0 0 1
2. Subjects were randomly allocated to groups 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
3. Allocation was concealed 1 0 1 0 0 1 1
4. The groups were similar at baseline regarding the most important prognostic indicators 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
5. There was blinding of all subjects 0 1 0 1 1 0 0
6. there was blinding of all therapists who administered the therapy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7. There was blinding of all assessors who measured at least one key outcome 0 1 0 1 1 0 0
8. Measures of at least one key outcome were obtained from more than 85% of the subjects initially allocated to groups 0 1 0 1 1 0 1
9. All subjects for whom outcome measures were available received the treatment or control condition as allocated 1 1 0 1 1 1 1
10. The results of between-group statistical comparisons are reported for at least one key outcome 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
11. The study provides both point measures and measures of variability for at least one key outcome 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
TOTAL 7/11 8/11 6/11 8/11 8/11 6/11 8/11