Skip to main content

Table 1 Methodological quality of included studies evaluated using the Brink and Louw critical appraisal tool

From: Supplementary addendum to “Non-radiographic methods of measuring global sagittal balance: a systematic review”; Reliability of the Spinal Mouse in adult back pain sufferers

Key information

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

High quality > 60%

Topalidou et al. 2014

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

4/7 = 57%

  1. Item key: 1—description of study population, 2—description of raters, 3—explanation of reference standards (validity only) 4—between rater blinding (reliability only), 5—within rater blinding (reliability), 6—variation of testing order (reliability), 7—time period between index test and reference standard (validity), 8—time period between repeated measures (reliability), 9—independency of reference standard from index test (validity), 10—description of index test procedure, 11—description of reference test procedure (validity), 12—explanation of any withdrawals, 13—appropriate statistics methods. Legend: reported, ✘ not reported