Biological agents

StudyID no.EV1EV2 (%)EV3EVRSB1SB2SB3SB4 (%)SB5SB6SB7SB8SB9SBRDB1aDB1bDB2DB3DB4DBRPB1PB2PB3PBRAB1AB1aAB2 (%)AB3AB4ABRGR
Biological agents vs epidural/Intradiscal injection
Becker, 2007149321±NR±WRCT+±<60?++++M++++?M+M?80–100+MM
Biological agents vs inactive control
Karppinen, 2003270398?NR±WNon-RCT<60?+?W++?MNAW??Cannot tell+?WW
Korhonen, 2005271741?NR±WRCT+?60–79++++?S+++??M+??M+80–100++SM
Biological agents vs non-opioids
Genevay, 2004216323±80–100±MHCS60–79±?W+++?WW+80–100++SW

−, no; ±, partial; +, yes; ?, unclear; M, moderate; NA, not applicable; NR, not reported; S, strong; W, weak.

From: Appendix 5, Quality assessment of included clinical effectiveness studies

Cover of The Clinical Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Management Strategies for Sciatica: Systematic Review and Economic Model
The Clinical Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Management Strategies for Sciatica: Systematic Review and Economic Model.
Health Technology Assessment, No. 15.39.
Lewis R, Williams N, Matar HE, et al.
Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2011 Nov.
© 2011, Crown Copyright.

Included under terms of UK Non-commercial Government License.

PubMed Health. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.