Table 2 Quality Assessment of Included Studies (7-point)
Author, year | Type | Randomization | Concealment of allocation | Double blinding | Withdrawals and dropouts | Jadad score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ponticelli 1993 (CsA vs. P/NT) | An open, prospective, randomized, multicentric, controlled study | According to a table of random numbers | By using sealed, completely opaque envelopes | Open-label | Yes | 5 |
Lieberman 1996(CsA vs. P/NT) | A double-blinded, prospectively randomized, placebo-controlled trial | By following computer based random numbers | By using sequentially labelled sealed envelopes | Both the patients and their pediatric nephroboglsts were blinded as to the administered study treatment | Yes | 7 |
Plank 2008 (CsA vs. CYC) | A controlled multicentre randomized open label trial | According to centre-specific computer-generated random lists | Describing as using allocation concealment but without any details | Open-label | Yes | 5 |
Choudhry 2009 (CsA vs. TAC) | A nonblind, randomized controlled trial | By following computer based random numbers | By using serially numbered opaque envelopes | Open-label | No | 5 |
Garin 2015 (CsA vs. P/NT) | A cross-over, randomized, controlled trial | Describing as a randomized trial without details | NA | NA | NA | 1 |
Geng 2018 (CsA vs. MMF) | A prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial | According to a table of random numbers | NA | NA | Yes | 3 |