Skip to main content

Table 6 Assessment of methodological quality of included studies using theDowns and Black scale (27)

From: The effect of interactive cognitive-motor training in reducing fall risk in older people: a systematic review

First author, year

Risk assesment items

 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

Agmon, 2011 [43]

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

1

0

Bieryla, 2013 [64]

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

0

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

1

0

Bisson, 2007 [46]

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

Chao, 2013 [65]

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

1

0

Chen, 2012 [47]

0

1

1

1

2

1

1

0

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

1

1

Cho, 2013 [39]

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

0

1

1

0

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

1

0

1

0

de Bruin, 2011 [59]

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

Duque, 2013 [40]

1

1

1

1

2

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

0

0

0

0

1

1

Franco, 2012 [57]

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

Fung, 2012 [35]

1

1

1

0

2

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

0

Griffin, 2012 [44]

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

0

1

0

0

1

0

0

0

1

0

0

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

Hsu, 2011 [29]

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

0

Keogh, 2013 [60]

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

1

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

1

0

0

Kim, 2013 [48]

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

1

0

Kosse, 2011 [49]/Lamoth, 2011 [66]

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

Kubicki, 2014 [45]

1

1

1

0

2

1

1

0

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

0

1

1

0

1

0

0

0

0

Lai, 2012 [50]

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

1

0

Laver, 2012 [37]

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

0

Lee, 2013 [38]

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

0

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

1

0

0

1

1

Maillot, 2012 [51]

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

0

0

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

Mendes, 2012 [31]

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

0

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

Mirelman, 2011 [32]

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

0

0

0

1

0

Orsega-Smith, 2012 [52]

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

Padala, 2012 [36]

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

0

0

1

0

Pichierri, 2012a [62]

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

Pichierri, 2012b [61]

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

Pluchino, 2012 [53]

1

1

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

0

0

1

1

1

0

1

1

0

1

1

0

0

0

Pompeu, 2012 [33]

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

Rendon, 2012 [54]

1

1

1

1

0

1

0

0

1

1

0

0

0

0

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

1

0

Rosenberg, 2010 [30]

1

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

1

0

Schoene, 2013 [58]

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Studenski, 2010 [55]

1

1

1

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

Suarez, 2006 [41]

0

1

1

0

0

1

1

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

1

1

0

0

1

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

Szturm, 2011 [63]

1

1

1

1

0

0

1

0

1

1

0

0

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

Williams, 2010 [42]

1

1

1

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

1

0

0

1

1

0

1

1

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

Yen, 2011 [34]

1

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Young, 2010 [56]

1

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

1

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

  1. Risk assessment items: Items 1–10 Reporting – 1. hypothesis/aim/objectives described?; 2. Main outcomes described?; 3. Participant characteristics described?; 4. Intervention/s described?; 5. distributions of principal confounders in each group described?; 6. Main findings described?; 7. Provision of estimates of random variability in the data for the main outcomes?; 8. Reporting of adverse events?; 9. Characteristics of participants lost to follow-up described?; 10. Actual probability values reported?; items 11–13 External validity – 11. Participants asked to participate representative for population from which they were recruited?; 12. Participants prepared to participate representative for population from which they were recruited?; 13. staff, places, and facilities where the participants were treated representative of the treatment the majority of participants receive?; items 14–20 Internal validity (bias) – 14. Blinding of study participants?; 15. Blinding of outcome assessors?; 16. If any of the results of the study were based on “data dredging”, was this made clear?; 17. In trials and cohort studies, do the analyses adjust for different lengths of follow-up of participants, or in case–control studies, is the time period between the intervention and outcome the same for cases and controls?; 18. Statistical tests appropriate?; 19. Was compliance with intervention/s reliable?; 20. Were the main outcome measures used accurate (valid and reliable)?; items 21–26 Internal validity (confounding) – 21. Were the participants in different intervention groups (trials and cohort studies) or were the cases and controls (case–control studies) recruited from the same population?; 22. Were study subjects in different intervention groups (trials and cohort studies) or were the cases and controls (case–control studies) recruited over the same period of time?; 23. Randomisation, and if yes procedure described?; 24. Allocation concealment?; 25. adequate adjustment for confounding in the analyses from which the main findings were drawn?; 26. Losses of participants to follow-up taken into account?; item 27 power – 27. Power analysis done a priori?; ratings: no = 0, unable to determine = 0, yes = 1; rating item 5: no = 0, partially = 1, yes = 2.