Skip to main content

Table 2 Quality assessment of the included studies

From: Cetuximab for esophageal cancer: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Bias

Selection bias

Performance bias

Attrition bias

Reporting bias (no selective reporting)

Detection bias

Study quality (score)

Study

Adequate random sequence generation

Similar baseline condition

Adequate allocation concealment

Adequate participant blinding

Adequate provider blinding

Similar or no co-interventions

Acceptable compliance

Acceptable drop-out rate

intention-to-treat analysis

Adequate outcome assessor blinding

Similar timing of outcome assessment

Studies included non-metastatic esophageal cancer

 Rades et al. (2014) [23]

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Unclear

Yes

Moderate (5)

 Zhang et al. (2014)

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Unclear

Yes

Moderate (5)

 Crosby et al. (2017) [21]

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Unclear

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Unclear

Yes

high (8)

 Ruhstaller et al. (2017)

Unclear

Yes

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Unclear

Yes

Moderate (7)

 Suntharalingam et al. (2017) [28]

Unclear

Yes

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Unclear

Yes

Moderate (7)

Studies included metastatic esophageal cancer

 Lorenzen et al. (2009) [14]

Unclear

Yes

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Unclear

Yes

Moderate (7)

 Chen et al. (2014) [22]

Unclear

Yes

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Unclear

No

Low (4)

 Feng et al. (2017) [25]

Yes

Yes

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Unclear

Yes

Moderate (7)

 Yang et al. (2017) [26]

Unclear

Yes

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Unclear

Yes

Moderate (6)

 Lu et al. (2017) [16]

Yes

Yes

Unclear

Unclear

Unclear

Yes

Unclear

Yes

Yes

Yes

Unclear

Yes

Moderate (7)