Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Critical appraisal of randomised controlled trials

From: Effectiveness of programs to promote cardiovascular health of Indigenous Australians: a systematic review

JBI checklist criteria (potential bias) Studies
Canuto
et al., 2012 [31]
Peiris
et al., 2015 [32]
1. Was true randomization used for assignment of participants to treatment groups? (selection bias) Yes Yes
2. Was allocation to treatment groups concealed? (selection bias) No No
3. Were treatment groups similar at the baseline? (selection bias/design bias) Yes Yes
4. Were participants blind to treatment assignment? (performance bias) No No
5. Were those delivering treatment blind to treatment assignment? (performance/detection bias) No No
6. Were outcomes assessors blind to treatment assignment? (ascertainment bias) No Yes
7. Were treatments groups treated identically other than the intervention of interest? (systematic difference/containment bias) Yes Yes
8. Was follow-up complete, and if not, were strategies to address incomplete follow-up utilized? (attrition bias) Yes Yes
9. Were participants analysed in the groups to which they were randomized? (intention to analysis) Yes Yes
10. Were outcomes measured in the same way for treatment groups? (instrumentation/testing effects threats) Yes Yes
11. Were outcomes measured in a reliable way? (measurement bias) Yes Yes
12. Was appropriate statistical analysis used? (performance/detection bias) Yes Yes
13. Was the trial design appropriate, and any deviations from the standard RCT design (individual randomization, parallel groups) accounted for in the conduct and analysis of the trial? (design bias) Yes Yes
Total (%) and quality ratinga 9/13 (69%)
Moderate
10/13 (77%)
Moderate
  1. aGood: at least 80%, moderate: 50–80%; poor: less than 50%