Study | Quality appraisal | Risk of bias appraisal | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Trial design | Participants | Intervention | Outcomes | Total (max 8) | Sequence generation | Risk of bias | Allocation concealment | Risk of bias | |
Aliasgharpour et al. [33] | 1 | 1.75 | 2 | 2 | 6.75 | Random number table | Low | Not described | Unclear |
Au et al. [37] | 0.75 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 6.75 | Matched design | Unclear | Not described | Unclear |
Fraser et al. [35] | 1.75 | 2 | 1.75 | 2 | 7.5 | Random number generator | Low | Not described | Unclear |
Helde et al. [29] | 1.25 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 7.25 | Computer-generated block randomisation | Low | Research assistant blinded | Low |
Ibinda et al. [34] | 1.25 | 1.25 | 0.5 | 1.5 | 4.5 | Computer-generated randomisation | Low | Not described | Unclear |
Losada-Camacho et al. [28] | 2 | 2 | 1.75 | 2 | 7.75 | Drawing of ballot papers | Low | Sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes | Low |
Lundgren et al. [30] | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 7 | Computer-generated randomisation | Low | Not described | Unclear |
May and Pfafflin. [15] | 1.25 | 2 | 0.75 | 1.5 | 5.5 | Not described | Unclear | Not described | Unclear |
McLaughlin and McFarland [32] | 1 | 1.75 | 2 | 2 | 6.75 | Computer-generated randomisation | Low | Not described | Unclear |
Olley et al. [36] | 1.5 | 2 | 1.25 | 1.75 | 6.5 | Alternate clinic visit | High | Not described | Unclear |
Pramuka et al. [31] | 1.5 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 7.5 | Random number table | Low | Consecutively numbered, sealed envelopes | Low |