Table 4.

Quality and applicability assessment of randomized controlled trials

Author (Reference)Rating CriteriaaFunding sourceOverall Quality RatingApplicability
1234567891011121314151617
Al Saraireh et al. (27)YNRNNAYUUNYNYNYUYNANInvestigatorPoorFair
Babamohamadi et al. (28)NRNRNUYUUNYNUNYYUUNNRPoorPoor
Beizaee et al. (29)YYYYYYYNYNYNNUYNAYUniversityFairFair
Blumenfield et al. (30)NRYUUNUYYYNNNYUYNNIndustry grantPoorFair
Cukor et al. (31)NRNRYUYYYYYNNYYUYNNNIDDKFairFair
Duarte et al. (32)YYNUYYYYYNNYYYYNNGovernmentFairFair
Friedli et al. (33)YYYNYYYYYYNNYUYNNNIH grantFairGood
Frih et al. (34)YNRUYYYNNYYNYYUYNNNRPoorFair
Gharekhani et al. (35)YUYNYNNYYYNNYYYNNUniversityPoorGood
Haghighat et al. (36)YYYUYYYYYUYNYYYYNAhvaz Jundishapur Univ Med SciGoodFair
Heshmatifar et al. (37)NRNRYUYUUNYNNYYUUNUNRPoorFair
Hosseini et al. (38)UNRYYYUUNYNNYYUYNNGovernmentPoorFair
Jahromi et al.NRNRYYYYNYYNUNYYNUNNRPoorFair
Kalani et al. (39)NUYUYUUUYUYNYYYUNUniversityPoorFair
Kouidi et al. (40)NRNRYUYUUNYNNYYUYNNNRPoorFair
Lerma et al. (41)YNRYUYYYNYNNNYYYNNGovernmentFairFair
Li et al. (42)YNYYYNNNNUUNYUYUNNRPoorFair
Liao et al. (43)YNRYYYUUUYNNNYUYNNNRPoorFair
Mehrotra et al. (44)YYUYYYNNYNYNYYYYNGovernment, University, NIDDK, DCIFairFair
Rahimipour et al. (45)UNRUUYUUUNUUUYUYUNNRPoorFair
Taraz et al. (46)YUYYYUUYYNNNYYYNNUniversity grantFairGood
Thomas et al. (47)YNRNUYYUNYNYNYYYNNUniversity grantFairFair
Tsay et al. (48)NRNRYUYUUNYNNYYUYNNGovernmentPoorFair
Wang et al. (49)NRNRYNYUUYYYYNYUYNNNRPoorFair
Wang et al. (50)YYYYYUYYYNNUYYYNNNRFairPoor
Widyaningrum et al. (51)NRNRYUYUUUNUUUYUYUNNRPoorPoor
  • Y, yes; NR, not reported; N, no; NA, not applicable; U, unclear; NIDDK, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; NIH, National Institutes of Health; Univ Med Sci, University of Medical Sciences; DCI, Dialysis Clinic Inc.

  • a The quality rating criteria (adapted from the US Preventive Services Task Force criteria [26]) involved evaluating the following questions:(1) randomization adequate?(2) allocation concealment adequate?(3) groups similar at baseline?(4) maintain comparable groups?(5) eligibility criteria specified?(6) outcome assessors masked?(7) care provider masked?(8) patient masked?(9) reporting of attrition, crossovers, adherence, and contamination?(10) important differential loss to follow-up or overall high loss to follow-up?(11) intention-to-treat analysis?(12) postrandomization exclusions?(13) were outcomes prespecified and defined, and ascertained using accurate methods?(14) intervention fidelity?(15) follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur? (minimum 4 wk for drugs)(16) appropriate handling of missing data?(17) evidence of selective outcome reporting?