Quality assessment of trials using the PEDro scale for methodological quality
| PEdro item | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | PEDro score |
| Chan et al 16 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | 7/10 |
| Chrisman et al 17 | Y | Y | N | N | N | N | Y | N | N | Y | N | 5/10 |
| Jensen et al 28 | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | 5/10 |
| Kleffelgaard et al 22 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 8/10 |
| Kurowski et al 23 | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | 6/10 |
| Leddy et al 18 | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | Y | N | Y | Y | 5/10 |
| Maerlender et al 24 | N | Y | N | N | N | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | 3/10 |
| Micay et al 19 | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | Y | Y | N | Y | Y | 6/10 |
| Relander et al 29 | Y | Y | N | Y | N | N | N | N | N | Y | Y | 4/10 |
| Reneker et al 20 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | 7/10 |
| Rytter et al 21 | Y | Y | Y | N | N | N | Y | N | Y | Y | Y | 6/10 |
| Schneider et al 30 | Y | Y | Y | Y | N | N | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | 8/10 |
Pedro scale item: (1) eligibility criteria specified, (2) random allocation, (3) concealed allocation, (4) group characteristics similar at baseline, (5) blinding of subjects, (6) blinding of therapists, (7) blinding of assessors, (8) less than 15% dropouts, (9) intention-to-treat analysis, (10) between-group statistical comparisons and (11) point measures and variability data. PEDro scores of 0–4 are considered ‘poor’, 4–5 ‘fair’, 6–8 ‘good’ and 9–10 ‘excellent’.