Skip to main content

Table 1 Assessment of risk of bias in included studies

From: Efficacy and safety of carbon ion radiotherapy for bone sarcomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Study

Criterion

A

b

c

d

e

f

g

h

i

j

Japan

Shiba 2021 [10]

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Mohamad 2018 [11]

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Imai 2017 [12]

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Imai 2016 [13]

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Matsunobu 2012 [14]

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Imai 2011 [15]

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Mizoe 2009 [16]

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Germany

Mattke 2018 [17]

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Uhl 2014 [18]

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Uhl 2014 [19]

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Combs 2009 [20]

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

China

Wu 2019 [21]

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

  1. (a) Were there clear criteria for inclusion in the case series?; (b) Was the condition measured in a standard, reliable way for all participants included in the case series?; (c) Were valid methods used for identification of the condition for all participants included in the case series?; (d) Did the case series have consecutive inclusion of participants?; (e) Did the case series have complete inclusion of participants?; (f) Was there clear reporting of the demographics of the participants in the study?; (g) Was there clear reporting of clinical information of the participants?; (h) Were the outcomes or follow-up results of cases clearly reported?; (i) Was there clear reporting of the presenting sites’/clinics’ demographic information?; (j) Was statistical analysis appropriate?