Skip to main content

Table 2 Details of studies included in NMA for the possession of fitted stair gates outcome

From: Using threshold analysis to assess the robustness of public health intervention recommendations from network meta-analyses: application to accident prevention in households with children under five

Intervention Comparison

Study Number

Study

Study quality and Risk of Bias

Number of stair gates/Total number of households

Usual care (1) vs. Education (2)

1

Nansel (2002), RCT

A = U,B = Y,F = N

70/89

76/85

2

Kendrick (2005), RCT

A = Y,B = U,F = Y

348.44/436.80a

310.93/376.78a

3

Nansel (2008), Non-RCT

A = Y,B = U,F = N

29/38

60/69

Usual care (1) vs. Education + Low/free equipment (3)

4

Clamp (1998), RCT

A = Y,B = N,F = Y

50/69

52/64

5

McDonald (2005), RCT

A = U,B = N,F = N

10/41

23/54

Usual care (1) vs. Education + Low/free equipment + Home safety inspection (4)

6

Kendrick (1999), Non-RCT

A = U,B = Y,F = N

214.26/323.61a

223.15/323.61a

Usual care (1) vs. Education + Low/free equipment + Fitting (5)

7

Watson (2005), RCT

A = U,B = N,F = Y

328/718

408/742

Usual care (1) vs. Education + Low/free equipment + Fitting + Home safety inspection (6)

8

Phelan (2010), RCT

B = N,F = N,C = Y

78/147

131/146

Education (2) vs. Education + Low/free equipment (3)

9

Posner (2004), RCT

A = U,B = Y,F = Y

25/47

28/49

Education (2) vs. Education + Low/free equipment + Fitting (5)

10

Sznajder (2003), RCT

A = N,B = N,F = Y

45/50

44/47

Education + low/free equipment (3) vs. Education + low/free equipment + Home safety inspection (4)

11

Gielen (2002), RCT

A = Y,B = N,F = Y

12.85/47.44a

10.87/47.44a

Education + Low/free equipment + Home safety inspection (4) vs. Education + Home safety inspection (7)

12

King (2001), RCT

A = Y,B = Y,F = N

158/482

166/469

  1. Last column includes the number of households that possessed stair gates out of the total number of households
  2. Abbreviations:
  3. 1.A Adequate allocation concealment, B Blinded outcome assessment, C The prevalence of confounders does not differ by more than 10% between treatment arms, CBA Controlled before-and-after study, F At least 80% participants of followed up in each arm, NMA Network meta-analysis, RCT Randomised clinical trial, U Unclear, Y Yes, N No, NR Not reported/not relevant
  4. 2.aFigures adjusted for the effect of clustering using ICC and method reported in Hubbard et al. 2014 [9]