Skip to main content

Table 2 Quality of the twelve studies as assessed by the Jadad score [34]

From: Probiotics' effects on the incidence of nosocomial pneumonia in critically ill patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Study Randomization Blinding Withdrawals and dropouts Quality Score
Barraud et al. [30] 2 2 1 5
Besselink et al. [33] 2 2 1 5
Forestier et al. [31] 2 2 1 5
Giamarellos-Bourboulis et al. [23] 1 2 0 3
Kanazawa et al. [24] 1 1 0 2
Knight et al. [32] 2 2 1 5
Morrow et al. [22] 1 2 1 4
Rayes et al. [25] 2 0 1 3
Rayes et al. [26] 2 1 1 4
Spindler-Vesel et al. [28] 1 1 0 2
Tan et al.[29] 2 1 1 4
  1. Each article was scored using a five-point scale that evaluates randomisation, blinding and completeness of patient follow-up (Jadad scale). One point was given if the study was described as randomised. An additional point was given if the randomisation method was described and was appropriate (for example, computer-generated table of random numbers), whereas a point was subtracted if the randomisation method was described and inappropriate. Similarly, one point was assigned to studies described as double-blinded, two points were assigned to studies for which the double-blinding method was described and appropriate (for example, identical placebo, active placebo,double-dummy) and zero points were assigned to studies for which the double-blinding method was described and inappropriate. One point was given if the article specified the numbers of and reasons for withdrawals and dropouts.