Skip to main content

Table 4 Assessment of the quality of selected randomized controlled trials using the CLEAR NPT checklist

From: Quality of reporting internal and external validity data from randomized controlled trials evaluating stents for percutaneous coronary intervention

  Yes
n (%)
No
n (%)
Unclear
n (%)
Adequate generation of allocation of sequence 77 (58.3) 0 55(41.7)
Concealment of treatment allocation 46 (34.8) 0 86 (65.2)
Details of intervention used in each group available 125 (94.7) 0 7 (5.3)
Care providers' experience or skill in each arm appropriate 3 (2.3) 0 129 (97.7)
Participants adequately blinded 23 (17.4) 63 (47.7) 46 (34.9)
Care providers adequately blinded 16 (12.1) 74 (56.1) 42 (31.8)
If patients and/or care providers were not adequately blinded:    
   All other treatments and care were the same in each group 97 (73.5) 5 (3.8) 9 (6.8)
   Withdrawals and lost to follow-up were the same in each group 46 (34.8) 6 (4.5) 61 (46.2)
Outcome assessors adequately blinded to assess the primary outcomes 39 (29.5) 44 (33.3) 49 (37.1)
If outcome assessors were not adequately blinded:    
   Specific methods were used to avoid ascertainment bias 2 (1.5) 13 (9.8) 76 (57.6)
   Follow-up schedule was the same in each group 105 (79.5) 2 (1.5) 23 (17.4)
   Main outcomes analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle 105 (79.5) 17 (12.9) 10 (7.6)