Appendix Table D-1, Study quality ratings: RCTs and non-randomized comparative studies - Local Therapies for Unresectable Primary Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Warning: The NCBI web site requires JavaScript to function. more...

Study	Study Design	Assembled comparable groups	Maintained comparable groups	Minimal follow up loss	Measurements equal, valid and reliable	Interventions clearly defined	Important outcomes considered	Appropriate analysis of results	Funding acknowledged	Overall rating
Sacco 2011	RCT	Yes^*****	Yes	Yes	No^*	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Fair
Malagari 2010	RCT	Yes	Yes	Yes	No^*	Yes	Yes	No^**	No	Poor
Morimoto 2010	RCT	Yes	Yes	No	No^*	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Poor
Brunello 2008	RCT	Yes	Yes	Yes	No^****	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Good
Lin 2005	RCT	Yes	Yes	Yes	No^*	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Fair
Lin 2004	RCT	Yes	Yes	Yes	No^*	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Fair
Recchia 2012	NRC	Yes	Yes	No^******	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	Poor
Xu 2009	NRC	No	No	Yes	No^*	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Poor
Chok 2006	NRC	Yes	Yes	No^******	No^*	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Poor
Yu 2009	NRC	Yes	Yes	Yes	No^*	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Poor

*: This response reflects that the authors did not describe blinding to outcome(s) of interest.
**: This response reflects that the study did not analyze results according to intent-to-treat analysis.
***: This response reflects that the study did not report overall survival.
****: Outcomes could not be blinded due to different radiological signs produced by the two intervention techniques.
*****: Randomization was done in an open fashion but known confounders between groups appear comparable.
******: Authors did not discuss follow up loss.
: Abbreviations: RCT: Randomized controlled trial; NRC: Non-randomized comparative study

Local Therapies for Unresectable Primary Hepatocellular Carcinoma [Internet].

Comparative Effectiveness Reviews, No. 114.

Belinson S, Yang Y, Chopra R, et al.

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.