Table 4 Methodological Assessment of descriptive and case series studies
From: The role for osmotic agents in children with acute encephalopathies: a systematic review
Study | Berger 2002 [34] | Peterson 2000 [33] | Khanna 2000 [30] | Newton 1997 [1] | Wald 1982 [31] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Was study based on a random or pseudo-random sample? | N | N | N | N | N |
Were the criteria for inclusion in the sample clearly defined? | Y | Y | Y | Y | N |
Were confounding factors identified and strategies to deal with them stated? | N | N | U | U | U |
Were outcomes assessed using objective criteria? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
If comparisons were being made, were there sufficient descriptions of the groups? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Was follow up carried out over a sufficient time period? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Were the outcomes of people who withdrew described and included in the analysis? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Were outcomes measures in a reliable way? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |
Was appropriate statistical analysis used? | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y |