Skip to main content

Table 1 RTI Items elected to assess risk of bias and precision of the included studies

From: Does postural sway change in association with manual therapeutic interventions? A review of the literature

Item number from original study* Dimension of bias Methods domain Assessment question Criteria / definitions / categories
2 Selection bias Sample definition and selection Are critical inclusion/ exclusion criteria clearly stated? • Age range, gender, etc. described?
• Specific inclusion/exclusion criteria stated?
6 Precision Sample definition and selection Was the sample size sufficiently large to detect a significant difference between groups? • Justification for selected sample size given?
• Were sample size calculations performed?
7 Performance bias Interventions/exposure outcomes What is the level of detail in describing the intervention? • Type of intervention, timing and frequency described?
• Was the intervention identical for all participants?
9 Selection bias Creation of treatment groups Is the selection of the comparison group appropriate • Is there a comparison/ control group?
• If so, are there fundamental differences between the groups on the basis of socio-demographic variables and the outcome variables at baseline?
• Do the controls represent the population from which the intervention group arose?
15 Information bias Soundness of information Are the outcomes assessed using reliable measures? • Was the reliability of the outcome assessment tested?
• If not, is the measurement protocol likely to yield reliable/valid results with regards to
- sampling duration
- number of repetitions
- visual condition
- foot position
based on a systematic review of the literature [18]
    Overall judgment • Low risk of bias: Bias, if present, is unlikely to alter the results seriously
     • Unclear risk of bias: Impossible to determine risk of bias (either missing or not described well enough)
     • High risk of bias: Bias may alter the results seriously
  1. * [17].