Skip to main content

Table 3 Methodological quality and risk of bias assessment of the included studies

From: Human tendon adaptation in response to mechanical loading: a systematic review and meta-analysis of exercise intervention studies on healthy adults

Study

Methodological quality

Risk of bias

Internal validity

Statistical validity

External validity

Total score [%]

Sequence

Allocation

Blinding

Outcome

Report

Other

1.1 a

1.2 a

1.3 a

1.4 a

2.1A b

2.1B b

2.1C b

2.1D b

2.1E b

2.1F b

2.1G b

2.2A b

2.2B b

3A b

3B b

Score [%]

4 a

5 a

Score [%]

6.1 a

6.2 a

7A b

7B b

7C b

7D b

7E b

7F b

8A b

8B b

8C b

8D b

8E b

Score [%]

      

Albracht et al., 2013 [15]

+

-

-

+

-

+

+

+

-

+

-

/

/

-

+

51

+

-

50

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

95

65

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Arampatzis et al., 2007 [29]

+

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

-

+

-

+

+

+

-

87

+

-

50

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

-

95

77

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Arampatzis et al., 2010 [28]

+

+

+

-

-

+

+

+

-

+

-

+

+

+

-

72

+

-

50

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

-

95

72

Unclear’

Unclear’

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Bohm et al. [31]

+

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

98

+

+

100

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

100

99

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Carroll et al., 2011 [61]

+

+

+

-

+

-

-

-

-

+

+

+

+

-

+

70

+

-

50

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

96

72

Unclear’

Unclear’

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Fletcher et al., 2010 [17]

+

-

-

+

-

+

+

-

+

+

-

/

/

+

+

60

+

-

50

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

100

70

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Fouré et al., 2009 [71]

+

-

-

+

-

+

-

-

-

-

-

/

/

+

+

46

+

-

50

+

+

-

-

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

88

61

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Foure et al., 2010a,b, 2011 [38,56,57]

+

-

+

+

-

+

-

-

-

+

-

-

+

+

+

63

+

-

50

+

+

-

-

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

88

67

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Foure et al., 2013 [43]

+

-

+

+

-

+

-

-

-

+

-

-

+

+

+

63

+

-

50

+

+

-

-

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

88

67

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Hansen et al., 2003 [62]

+

-

+

-

-

-

-

+

+

+

-

+

+

-

+

56

+

-

50

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

96

67

Unclear’

Unclear’

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Hougthon et al., 2013 [39]

+

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

-

-

+

+

+

84

+

+

100

+

+

-

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

92

92

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Unclear+

Kongsgaard et al., 2007 [24]

+

+

+

-

+

+

-

+

-

+

-

+

+

+

+

74

+

-

50

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

96

73

Unclear’

Unclear’

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Kubo et al., 2001a,b [37,42]

+

+

+

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

+

+

-

+

+

66

+

-

50

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

100

72

Unclear’

Unclear’

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Kubo et al., 2002 [25]

+

-

+

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

+

+

-

+

+

52

+

-

50

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

96

66

Unclear’

Unclear’

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Kubo et al., 2003 [63]

+

+

+

+

-

-

-

-

-

-

+

/

/

+

+

86

+

-

50

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

96

77

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Kubo et al., 2006a [40]

+

-

+

-

-

-

-

+

-

+

+

+

-

+

-

49

+

-

50

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

-

95

65

Unclear’

Unclear’

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Kubo et al., 2006b [87]

+

-

+

+

+

-

-

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

80

+

-

50

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

100

77

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Kubo et al., 2006c [88]

+

-

+

-

+

-

-

+

-

+

-

+

+

+

-

56

+

-

50

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

-

95

67

Unclear’

Unclear’

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Kubo et al., 2007 [59]

+

-

+

-

-

-

-

+

-

+

+

+

-

+

+

56

+

-

50

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

100

69

Unclear’

Unclear’

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Kubo et al., 2009 [60]

+

-

+

-

+

-

-

+

-

+

-

+

+

+

-

56

+

-

50

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

-

95

67

Unclear’

Unclear’

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Kubo et al., 2010 [52]

+

-

+

+

-

-

-

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

78

+

-

50

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

100

76

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Kubo et al., 2012 [72]

+

-

+

+

-

-

-

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

-

70

+

-

50

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

100

73

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Malliaras et al., 2013 [41]

+

+

+

+

+

-

-

+

-

+

+

-

-

+

+

80

+

-

50

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

100

77

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Seynnes et al., 2009 [30]

+

+

+

-

+

-

-

+

+

-

-

+

+

+

+

78

+

-

50

+

+

+

-

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

+

96

74

Unclear’

Unclear’

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

  1. Methodological quality: 1 Study design (1.1 Mechanical properties, 1.2 Material properties, 1.3 Morphological properties, 1.4 Control group), 2 Methods (2.1 Mechanical properties, 2.1A Object of investigation, 2.1B Gravitational forces, 2.1C Axes misalignment, 2.1D Antagonistic muscle activation, 2.1E Lever arm measured, 2.1F Joint angle change, 2.1G Used multiple trials, 2.2 Morphological properties, 2.2A MRI, 2.2B different positions), 3 Cofactors (3A Gender, 3B Activity level), 4 Statistical tests, 5 Power analysis, 6 Eligibility (6.1 Participants, 6.2 Variables), 7 Description exercise protocol (7A Intensity, 7B Duration single stimulus, 7C Repetitions, 7D Sets, 7E Weeks, 7F Times per week), 8 Description participants (8A Gender, 8B Age, 8C Body height, 8D Body weight, 8E Activity level). The single criteria were rated (+, point; -, no point; /, not included) and used to calculate the quality score for each category (i.e., internal, statistical, and external validity). The average of the three scores gives the total score. aA full point was assigned to each sub-category for the calculation of the score in the respective validity section (assigned points/possible points * 100). bThe sub-categories of the respective block were pooled to a single point (assigned points/possible points). Risk of bias [46]: Sequence, adequate sequence generation; Allocation, allocation concealment; Blinding, blinding outcome assessor; Outcome, incomplete outcome data; Report, selective outcome reporting; Other, other sources of bias. Judgments: Yes, low risk of bias; Unclear, insufficient information reported (’, only one group; +, significant difference of baseline tendon cross-sectional area values between the control and training group). The three studies of Foure et al. [38,56,57] and the two studies of Kubo et al. [37,42] were merged as one, since the results of one intervention were reported in different publications.