Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature is making Coronavirus research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Table 4 Risk of bias assessment of the included studies according to Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool [75]

From: Follow-up efficacy of physical exercise interventions on fall incidence and fall risk in healthy older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Study Risk of bias
Sequence Allocation Blinding Outcome Report Other Notes
Ballard et al. [90] Yes Unclear Unclear Yes Yes Yes Control group attended the exercise program in the first 2  weeks as a motivation.
Examiners were not blinded to groups.
Fall diaries were completed at 1-year follow-up, not on a monthly basis.
Beyer et al. [50] Yes Yes Unclear Yes Yes Yes The follow-up started from the point of group assignment.
Fitzharris et al. [73] Yes Unclear Unclear Yes Unclear Unclear  
Freiberger et al. [82]a,b Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Unclear  
Halvarsson et al. [94] Yes Yes Unclear Yes Yes Yes Seventeen out of the 59 total had neurological and cardiovascular diseases.
Fall frequency was assessed retrospectively at the end of the follow-up, not on a monthly basis calendars.
Iliffe et al. [83]a,b Yes Unclear Yes Yes Yes Yes  
Kamide et al. [95] Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes  
Karinkanta et al. [51]a,b,c Yes Unclear Unclear Yes Yes Unclear  
Li et al. [89] Yes Unclear Unclear Yes Yes Unclear  
Liu-Ambrose et al. [96] Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Unclear  
Logan et al. [129] Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes  
Logghe et al. [97] Yes Unclear Yes Yes Yes Yes  
Lord et al. [101] Yes Unclear Unclear Yes Yes Unclear  
Means et al. [86] Yes Unclear Unclear Yes Yes Yes Control group attended balance program without training on obstacle course.
Means et al. [98] Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes  
Morgan et al. [84] Yes Unclear Unclear Yes Yes Unclear  
Salminen et al. [130] Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes  
Suzuki et al. [99] Yes Unclear Yes Yes Yes Yes  
Taylor et al. [76]a,b Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Unclear The follow-up duration started from the entry point in the study to the final assessment point (i.e., the intervention duration is included in the follow-up period).
Trombetti et al. [88] Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Unclear The control group was a delayed intervention control group that started the same implemented intervention during the 6 months of follow-up.
Uusi-Rasi et al. [87] Yes Unclear Yes Yes Unclear Unclear  
Weerdesteyn et al. [100] Yes Unclear Unclear Yes Yes Unclear Half of the intervention group was not randomly assigned.
The follow-up started from the point of group assignment.
Whitehead et al. [85] Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Unclear The follow-up started from the point of group assignment.
Yamada et al. [78] Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Unclear  
Yamada et al. [79] Yes Yes Unclear Yes Yes Unclear  
Yamada et al. [77] Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Unclear  
  1. Sequence Was the allocation sequence adequately generated? Allocation Was allocation adequately concealed? Blinding Was knowledge of the allocated intervention adequately prevented during the study? Outcome Were incomplete outcome data adequately addressed? Report Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting? Other Was the study apparently free of other problems that could put it at high risk of bias? The studies followed by the letters a or b or c mean that they include different intervention groups, and each letter resembles one intervention group