Table 2 |
||||||
|
Results of the methodological quality analysis of individual RCTs |
||||||
|
Sequence generation |
Allocation concealment |
Blinding to group assignment |
Incomplete outcome data |
Selective outcome reporting |
Other potential sources of biasa |
|
|
|
||||||
|
Children and Adolescents |
||||||
|
Macdonald et al. [18] |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
|
Macdonald et al. [19] |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
|
MacKelvie et al. [20] |
Low risk |
Unclear |
Low risk |
High riskb |
Low risk |
High riska3 |
|
Petit et al. [21] |
Low risk |
Unclear |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
High riska4 |
|
Weeks et al. [22] |
Unclear |
Unclear |
High riskc |
Low risk |
Low risk |
High riska2,a4 |
|
Adults |
||||||
|
Vainionpaa et al. [23] |
Low risk |
Low risk |
High riskd |
Low risk |
Low risk |
High riska3 |
|
Older Adults |
||||||
|
Cheng et al. [13] |
Low risk |
Unclear |
High riskd |
High riske |
Low risk |
High riska3 |
|
Karinkanta et al. [15] |
Low risk |
Low risk |
High riskd |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
|
Liu-Ambrose et al. [53] |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
Low risk |
High riska2,a4 |
|
Uusi-Rasi et al. [14] |
Low risk |
Low risk |
High riskd |
Low risk |
Low risk |
High riska3 |
|
|
||||||
|
aOther potential sources of bias included 1. >5% (even though not significant) imbalance in bone baseline variables that was not adjusted for in the statistical analysis, 2. Possible inadequate exercise dose according to general exercise recommendations (<3×/week), 3. Small sample size (<100 participants) in relation to the measurement precision, and 4. Short follow-up time (<12-months). bA clear imbalance between withdrawals of controls and trainees in Tanner Stage 1. cIndividual adolescent pupils randomised rather than schools dNo supervised sham exercise for controls eNo intention-to-treat results reported |
||||||
|
Nikander et al. BMC Medicine 2010 8:47 doi:10.1186/1741-7015-8-47 |
||||||
