Cdn-links.lww.com
|Study |Design |Study population |Risk of bias |Limitations |Inconsistency |Imprecision |Quality of evidence |
|[1] Parolini, F., E. Leva, et |Retrospective longitudinal|35 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |High |
|al. (2013). |study | | | | | | |
|[2] Manfredi, M. A., M. W. |Retrospective record |24 |No comparison group |Small sample size |Study objective was to |Only descriptive analysis|Very low |
|Anjum, et al. (2011). |review | | | |assess efficacy for | | |
| | | | | |which a comparison group| | |
| | | | | |is necessary | | |
|[3] Lilja, H. E. and T. Wester |Retrospective record |147 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |High |
|(2008). |review | | | | | | |
|[4] Lisy, J., M. Hetkova, et |Cross sectional study |25 |No comparison group |Small sample size |Not clear how the study |Only descriptive analysis|Very low |
|al. (1998). | | | | |population was selected.| | |
| | | | | |The grouping of the | | |
| | | | | |study population not | | |
| | | | | |clear from the result | | |
| | | | | |section. No baseline | | |
| | | | | |information about the | | |
| | | | | |study population | | |
|[5] Peyvasteh, M., S. |Retrospective follow up |51 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |High |
|Askarpour, et al. (2006). |study | | | | | | |
|[6] McCann, F., L. Michaud, et |Retrospective record |17 |Nothing significant |Small sample size |Limited baseline |Only descriptive analysis|Very low |
|al. (2014). |review | | | |information about the | | |
| | | | | |study population | | |
|[7] Morikawa, N., T. Honna, et |Case reports | | | | | | |
|al. (2008). | | | | | | | |
|[8] Gottrand, F., F. |Only abstract | | | | | | |
|Couttenier, et al. (2011). | | | | | | | |
|[9] Aldabbagh M. H. et al., |Prospective follow up |20 |No comparison group |Small sample size |Not clear how results |Only descriptive analysis|Very low |
|(2012) |study | | | |were analysed | | |
|[10] Ghandhi, R. P., A. Cooper,|Not clear |12 |Not clear |Very small sample size |The study objective is |Only descriptive analysis|Very low |
|et al. (1989). | | | | |not clear | | |
|[11] Chapuy, L., M. Pomerleau, |Retrospective record |21 |Comparison to historical |small sample size in each |Not clear if the study |Authors do not mention if|Very low |
|et al. (2014). |review and survey | |cohort |sub-groups |sub-groups were |the study factors were | |
| | | | | |comparable |statistically different | |
| | | | | | |between different | |
| | | | | | |sub-groups | |
|[12] Chittmittrapap, S., L. |Retrospective follow up |184 |Not clear |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Not clear how the |Low |
|Spitz, et al. (1990). |study | | | | |analysis was dome | |
|[13] Chang, E. Y., H. K. Chang,|Retrospective record |72 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Authors do not mention |Moderate |
|et al. (2012). |review | | | | |if post operative | |
| | | | | | |complications differed | |
| | | | | | |according to different | |
| | | | | | |surgical procedures | |
|[14] Caldaro, T., F. Torroni, |Case series analysis |26 |No comparison group |Small sample size |Nothing significant |The study objective was |Very low |
|et al. (2013). | | | | | |to demonstrate | |
| | | | | | |effectiveness of | |
| | | | | | |dilatation with dynamic | |
| | | | | | |stent for which a | |
| | | | | | |comparison group is | |
| | | | | | |necessary | |
|[15] Antoniou, D., M. Soutis, |Retrospective record |59 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Moderate |
|et al. (2010). |review | | | | | | |
|[16] Brown, A. K. and P. K. Tam|Retrospective record |66 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Authors do not mention |Moderate |
|(1996). |review | | | | |the correlation | |
| | | | | | |coefficients | |
|[17] Hoffer, F. A., H. S. |Retrospective record |9 |No comparison group |Very small sample size |Not clear |Descriptive case series |Very low |
|Winter, et al. (1987). |review | | | | |analysis | |
|[18] Hagander, L., C. |Retrospective cohort study|98 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |High |
|Muszynska, et al. (2012). | | | | | | | |
|[19] Ibrahim, A. H., T. A. Al |Histological study | | | | | | |
|Malki, et al. (2007). | | | | | | | |
|[20] Sillen, U., S. Hagberg, et|Retrospective record |110 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Only descriptive analyses|Moderate |
|al. (1988). |review | | | | | | |
|[21] Serhal, L., F. Gottrand, |Retrospective longitudinal|62 |Nothing significant |No information on the |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Moderate |
|et al. (2010). |study | | |background characteristics| | | |
| | | | |of the study population | | | |
|[22] Romeo, E., F. Foschia, et |Retrospective record |47 |Not clear if the study |Not clear |Study objective not |Not clear how the |Very low |
|al. (2011). |review | |population from the two | |clear |analysis was done | |
| | | |different time points are | | | | |
| | | |comparable | | | | |
|[23] Sandgren, K. and G. |Retrospective follow up |36 |No comparison group |No background information |Without a comparison |Only descriptive |Very low |
|Malmfors (1998). |study | | |of the study population |group effectiveness |statistics | |
| | | | | |cannot be established | | |
|[24] Said, M., M. Mekki, et al.|Prospective descriptive |25 |Nothing significant |Small sample size |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Moderate |
|(2003). |study | | | | | | |
|[25] Newman, B. and T. M. |Prospective follow up |61 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |High |
|Bender (1997). |study | | | | | | |
|[26] Michaud, L., F. Coutenier,|Retrospective record |61 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |High |
|et al. (2013). |review | | | | | | |
|[27] Thomason, M. A. and B. B. |Case reports | | | | | | |
|Gay (1987). | | | | | | | |
|[28] Tam, P. K. H., A. Sprigg, |Not clear |33 |Not clear |Not clear |Study objective not |Only descriptive analysis|Very low |
|et al. (1991). | | | | |clear | | |
|[29] Tsai, J. Y., L. Berkery, |Retrospective record |81 |Not clear |Not clear |Study objective not |Not clear how the |Very low |
|et al. (1997). |review | | | |clear |analyses was done | |
|[30] Lang, T., H. P. Hummer, et|Retrospective follow up |22 |Nothing significant |Small sample size |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Low |
|al. (2001). |study | | | | | | |
|[31] Thyoka, M., A. Barnacle, |Retrospective record |103 |No comparison group |Limited information about |Not clear if the study |Results describe the |Very low |
|et al. (2013). |review | | |the baseline information |groups are comparable. |outcome of the procedure | |
| | | | |of the study groups | |in two different age | |
| | | | | | |groups. Without a | |
| | | | | | |comparison group | |
| | | | | | |effectiveness cannot be | |
| | | | | | |inferred. | |
|[32] Sri Paran, T., D. |Retrospective follow up |21 |Nothing significant |Small sample size |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Moderate |
|Decaluwe, et al. (2007). |study | | | | | | |
|[33] Ko, H.-K., J. H. Shin, et |Retrospective record |29 |No comparison group |Nothing significant |Not clear how the |Without a comparison |Very low |
|al. (2006). |review | | | |authors accounted for |group effectiveness | |
| | | | | |the different follow up |cannot be inferred | |
| | | | | |time | | |
|[34] van der Zee, D. and C. |Retrospective record |19 |Nothing significant |Small sample size |Not clear if authors |Only descriptive analysis|Very low |
|Hulsker (2013). |review | | | |accounted for the wide | | |
| | | | | |age range of the | | |
| | | | | |patients when evaluating| | |
| | | | | |different complications | | |
|[35] Zhang, Z., Y. Huang, et |Retrospective record |48 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Not clear if the outcome|Only descriptive analysis|Very low |
|al. (2010). |review | | | |of the surgical | | |
| | | | | |operation differed | | |
| | | | | |according to the age of | | |
| | | | | |the study participant or| | |
| | | | | |due to presence of other| | |
| | | | | |anomalies | | |
|[36] Yeming, W., S. Somme, et |Retrospective follow up |20 |Not clear if the two study |Small sample size |Limited baseline |The authors do not |Very low |
|al. (2002). |study | |groups are comparable | |information about the |mention the effect of | |
| | | | | |study population. Very |other factors on the | |
| | | | | |wide range of the study |study outcome. Only | |
| | | | | |population. |descriptive analyses. | |
|[37] Vasudevan, S. A., F. |Case reports | | | | | | |
|Kerendi, et al. (2002). | | | | | | | |
|[38] Upadhyaya, V. D., A. N. |Follow up study |50 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Does not provide |Moderate |
|Gangopadhyaya, et al. (2007). | | | | | |confidence interval for | |
| | | | | | |the odds ratio. | |
|[39] Benjamin, B. (1993). |Retrospective record |51 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Only descriptive analyses|Moderate |
| |review | | | | | | |
|[40] Elia, P. P., E. Lago, et |Only abstract | | | | | | |
|al. (2011). | | | | | | | |
|[41] Romeo, E., F. Foschia, et |Only abstract | | | | | | |
|al. (2010). | | | | | | | |
|[42] Uhlen, S., P. Fayoux, et |Case report | | | | | | |
|al. (2006). | | | | | | | |
|[43] Michaud, L. and F. |Don’t have the article | | | | | | |
|Gottrand (2011). | | | | | | | |
|[44] Gatzinsky, V., L. J ö |Follow up study |73 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |High |
|nsson , et al. (2010). | | | | | | | |
|[45] Caplan, A. (2013). |Review paper | | | | | | |
|[46] Bouman, N. H., H. M. Koot,|Follow up study |36 |As the study participants were|Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing |Moderate |
|et al. (1999). | | |not blinded to the study | | |significant | |
| | | |objectives there might have | | | | |
| | | |been over reporting of | | | | |
| | | |symptoms | | | | |
|[47] Burjonrappa, S. C., S. |Prospective follow up |51 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |High |
|Youssef, et al. (2011). |study | | | | | | |
|[48]Hassall, E. (2011). |Not done | | | | | | |
|[49] Adzick, N. S., J. H. |Case report | | | | | | |
|Fisher, et al. (1989). | | | | | | | |
|[50] LaQuaglia, M. P., M. Gray,|Case report | | | | | | |
|et al. (1987). | | | | | | | |
|[51] Gottrand, M., L. Michaud, |Case report | | | | | | |
|et al. (2013). | | | | | | | |
|[52] Ludman, L. and L. Spitz |Follow up study |28 |Nothing significant |Small sample size |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Moderate |
|(2003). | | | | | | | |
|[53] Deurloo, J. A., J. J. B. |Case report | | | | | | |
|Van Lanschot, et al. (2001). | | | | | | | |
|[54] Deurloo, J. A., S. |Follow up study |97 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |High |
|Ekkelkamp, et al. (2005). | | | | | | | |
|[55] Maynard, S. and M. Bouin |review | | | | | | |
|(2013). | | | | | | | |
|[56] Ure, B. M., E. Slany, et |Case series analysis |9 |No direct comparison group |Very small sample size |Not clear how healthy |Comparison with control |Very low |
|al. (1995). | | | | |volunteers were selected|population from other | |
| | | | | | |published data | |
|[57] Peetsold, M. G., H. A. |Prospective follow up |66 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |High |
|Heij, et al. (2010). |study | | | | | | |
|[58] Walker, K., R. Halliday, |Case control study |93 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |High |
|et al. (2013). | | | | | | | |
|[59] Pultrum, B. B., C. M. |Case report | | | | | | |
|Bijleveld, et al. (2005). | | | | | | | |
|[60] Moreau, B., D. Levesque, |Case control study |273 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |High |
|et al. (2009). | | | | | | | |
|[61] Koivusalo, A., M. P. |Retrospective record |291 |Response rate among cases |Lower response rate in |Nothing significant |Not clear how the control|Very low |
|Pakarinen, et al. (2005). |review and survey | |higher than among control |controls | |was selected and if they | |
| | | |which might have led to | | |were comparable to the | |
| | | |differential misclassification| | |study population | |
|[62] Sistonen, S. J., A. |Prospective cohort study |272 |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |Nothing significant |High |
|Koivusalo, et al. (2008). | | | | | | | |
|[63] Taylor, A. C., K. J. |Prospective follow up |132 |Response rate ................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related searches
- posting links for companies
- promote links for free
- make money posting links online
- fda links to dog food
- companies that need links posted
- posting links online scam
- legitimate posting links from home
- jobs posting links for companies
- how to cite links in mla format
- no fee posting links jobs
- posting links online jobs
- what is posting links job