Skip to main content
Account

Table 2 Quality assessment and risk of bias using the modified Newcastle–Ottawa scale

From: The importance of inflammatory biomarkers in non-specific acute and chronic low back pain: a systematic review

  

Selection

Comparability

Exposure

  

Study ID

Design

Definition of cases (Maximum: *)

Representativeness of the cases (Maximum: *)

Selection of controls (Maximum: *)

Definition of controls (Maximum: *)

Comparability of cases and controls on the basis of the design or analysis (Maximum: **)

Assessment of exposure (Maximum: *)

Same method of ascertainment for cases and controls (Maximum: *)

Non-response rate (Maximum: *)

Total score (out of 9)

Risk of bias (low/moderate/high)

Heffner et al.

Case–control study

–

*

*

–

**

–

*

–

5

Moderate

Matthew S. Briggs et al.

Case–control study

*

*

–

–

**

*

*

–

6

Moderate

Queiroz et al.

Case–control study

*

*

*

–

**

*

*

–

7

Low

Yong Li et al.

Case–control study

*

*

*

–

**

*

*

–

7

Low

Klyne et al.

Case–control study

*

*

*

–

**

*

*

–

7

Low

Luchting B. et al.

Case–control study

-

*

*

–

**

–

–

–

4

Moderate

Queiroz et al.

Case–control study

*

*

*

–

**

–

*

–

6

Moderate

Klyne et al.

Case–control study

*

*

*

–

**

*

*

–

7

Low

Teodorczyk-Injeyan et al.

Case–control study

–

*

*

*

*

*

*

–

6

Moderate

Kevin Kwan Ngai Ho et al.

Case–control study

*

*

–

–

**

*

*

–

6

Moderate

Payman Dadkhah et al.

Case–control study

*

*

*

–

**

*

*

–

7

Low

Hao-Wei Xu et al.

Case–control study

*

*

*

–

**

*

*

–

7

Low

  

Selection

Comparability

Exposure

  

Study ID

Design

Representativeness of the exposed cohort (Maximum: *)

Selection of the non-exposed cohort (Maximum: *)

Ascertainment of exposure (Maximum: *)

Demonstration that outcome of interest was not present at start of study (Maximum: *)

Comparability of cohorts on the basis of the design or analysis (Maximum: **)

Assessment of outcome (Maximum: *)

Was follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur (Maximum: *)

Adequacy of follow-up of cohorts (Maximum: *)

Total score (out of 9)

Risk of bias (low/moderate/high)

Katja Gebhardt et al.

Longitudinal cohort study

*

*

–

–

**

*

*

–

6

Moderate

Amber M Beynon et al.

Longitudinal cohort study

*

*

–

*

**

*

*

–

7

Low

Klyne et al.

Longitudinal cohort study

*

*

*

–

**

*

*

–

7

Low

  1. Results of the risk of bias assessment using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale differentiated according to case–control and cohort studies. For “selection”, a maximum of four stars could be obtained; for “comparability”, two stars; and for “exposure”, three stars. A total score range was 0–9: low risk of bias was a score of 7–9, moderate risk of bias was a score of 4–6 and high risk of bias was a score of 0–3