RCT | Hotu et al. (2010) [22] | Comparable Cohort | Kondalsamy-Chennakesavan (2003) [26] | Descriptive/Case Series | Tan et al. (2014) [23] | Walker et al. (2014) [25] | Walker et al. (2013) [24] | Amega (2012) [21] | Shephard et al. (2006) [27] | Qualitative | Walker et al. (2012) [34] | Tchan et al. (2012) [33] | Economic | Gador-Whyte et al. (2014) [31] | Baker et al. (2005) [30] | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Q1. | Was the assignment to treatment groups truly random? | Y | Is the sample representative of patients in the population as a whole? | Y | Was the study based on a random or pseudo-random sample? | N | N | N | N | N | There is congruity between the stated philosophical perspective and the research methodology? | Y | U | Is there a well-defined question? | Y | Y |
Q2. | Were participants blinded to treatment? | N | Are the patients at a similar point in the course of their condition? | N | Were the criteria for inclusion in the sample clearly defined? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | There is congruity between the research methodology and the research question or objectives? | Y | Y | Is there a comprehensive description of alternatives? | NA | NA |
Q3. | Was allocation to treatment groups concealed from the allocator? | Y | Has bias been minimized in relation to selection of cases and controls? | U | Were confounding factors identified and strategies to deal with them stated? | N | Y | Y | N | N | There is congruity between the research methodology and the methods used to collect data? | Y | Y | Are all important and relevant costs and outcomes for each alternative identified? | Y | U |
Q4. | Were the outcomes of people who withdrew described and included in the analysis | Y | Are confounding factors identified and strategies to deal with them stated? | Y | Were outcomes assessed using objective criteria? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | There is congruity between the research methodology and the representation and analysis of data? | Y | Y | Has clinical effectiveness been established? | NA | Y |
Q5 | Were those assessing outcomes blind to the treatment allocation? | N | Are outcomes assessed using objective criteria? | Y | If comparisons are being made, were there sufficient descriptions of the groups? | NA | NA | NA | N | NA | There is congruence between the research methodology and the interpretation of results? | Y | Y | Are costs and outcomes measured accurately? | Y | Y |
Q6. | Were the control and treatment groups comparable at entry? | Y | Was follow-up carried out over a sufficient time period? | Y | Was follow-up carried out over a sufficient time period? | N | N | N | U | N | There is a statement locating the researcher culturally or theoretically | N | N | Are costs and outcomes valued credibly? | Y | U |
Q7. | Were groups treated identically other than for the named interventions? | Y | Were the outcomes of people who withdrew described and included in the analysis? | Y | Were the outcomes of people who withdrew included in the analysis? | N | Y | Y | N | Y | The influence of the researcher on the research, and vice-versa, is addressed | N | N | Are costs and outcomes adjusted for differential timing? | U | Y |
Q8. | Were outcomes measured in the same way for all groups? | Y | Were outcomes measured in a reliable way? | U | Were outcomes measured in a reliable way? | Y | Y | Y | U | N | Participants and their voices are adequately represented | Y | Y | Is there an incremental analysis of costs and consequences? | N | Y |
Q9. | Were outcomes measured in a reliable way? | Y | Was appropriate statistical analysis used? | Y | Was appropriate statistical analysis used? | Y | Y | Y | NA | Y | The research is ethical according to current criteria or evidence of ethical approval by an appropriate body | Y | Y | Are sensitivity analyses conducted to investigate uncertainty in estimates of cost or consequences? | N | Y |
Q10. | Was appropriate statistical analysis used? | Y | Conclusions drawn in the research report appear to flow from the analysis or interpretation of the data | Y | Y | Do study results include all issues of concern to users? | Y | U | ||||||||
Q11. | Are the results generalizable to the setting of interest in the review? | U | U | |||||||||||||
Quality Ratinga | 8/10 Good | 6/9 Moderate | 4/8 Moderate | 6/8 Moderate | 6/8 Moderate | 2/8 Poor | 4/8 Moderate | 8/10 Good | 7/10 Moderate | 5/9 Moderate | 6/10 Moderate |