Skip to main content

Table 7 Summary of methodological quality of included studies

From: Adjunct clinical interventions that influence vaginal birth after cesarean rates: systematic review

MMATa criteria

Screening questions

Quantitative/ control group

Quantitative non-randomized

Totalb

Study

Clear research questions or objectives?

Do collected data address the research questions/objective?

2.1 Clear description of randomization?

2.2 Clear description of allocation concealment (or blinding)?

2.3 Complete outcome data (≥80%)?

2.4 Low withdrawal/drop-out (< 20%)?

3.1 Participants/organizations recruitment - minimizes selection bias?

3.2 Appropriate measurements used for intervention & outcomes?

3.3 Participants/organizations comparable, or are differences accounted for?

3.4 Complete outcome data (80% or above) or acceptable follow-up rate?

Ayres-De-Campos (2015)

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰

✰

–

✰

✰✰✰ (75%)

Bickell (1996)

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰

✰

✰

✰

✰✰✰✰(100%)

Bellows (2016)

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰

✰

✰

✰

✰✰✰✰(100%)

Cleary-Goldman (2005)

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

–

✰

–

✰

✰✰ (50%)

Eden (2014)

✰

✰

✰

–

–

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰✰ (50%)

Feldman (2015)

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰

✰

✰

✰

✰✰✰✰(100%)

Fraser (RCT)

✰

✰

✰

 

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰✰✰ (75%)

Gardner (2014)

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰

–

–

✰

✰✰ (50%)

Kosecoff (1987)

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰

✰

–

–

✰✰ (50%)

Liu (2013)

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰

✰

–

✰

✰✰✰ (75%)

Lomas (1991)

✰

✰

✰

–

✰

–

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰✰ (50%)

Montgomery (2007)

✰

✰

✰

✰

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰✰✰✰(100%)

Myers (1993)

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

–

✰

–

✰

✰✰ (50%)

Pinette (2004)

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰

✰

–

✰

✰✰✰ (75%)

Russillo (2008)

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰

✰

–

✰

✰✰✰ (75%)

Sanchez-Ramos (1990)

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰

✰

–

✰

✰✰✰ (75%)

Santerre (1996)

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰

✰

–

✰

✰✰✰ (75%)

Studnicki (1997)

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰

✰

✰

✰

✰✰✰✰(100%)

White (2016)

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰

✰

✰

✰

✰✰✰✰(100%)

Wong (2014)

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰

✰

–

–

✰✰ (50%)

Yee (2017)

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰

✰

✰

✰

✰✰✰✰(100%)

Zhang (2016)

✰

✰

–

–

✰

–

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰ (25%)

Zweifler (2016)

✰

✰

NA

NA

NA

NA

✰

✰

✰

✰

✰✰✰✰(100%)

  1. a Assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool; b Total score is out of four stars (✰✰✰✰), whereby each assessment criterion met by a study was awarded a star (✰), and a criterion not met by a study was marked with a dash (−); NA not applicable