Nonselective beta-blockers in cirrhotic patients with no or small varices: A meta-analysis

Table 3 Risk of bias for the study

Entry	Judgment	Support for judgment
Andreani (1990)
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: “the patients in each center were randomly assigned”
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not described
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)	High risk	Quote: “these treatments were not administered blindly”
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)	Unclear risk	Not described
Incomplete outcome data addressed (attrition bias)	High risk	Quote: “Fourteen patients were lost to follow-up after a period of 4.9 ± 1.9 mo (propranolol=six, sclerosis=six, placebo=two)”
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Both potential efficacy and complications were reported. Review authors do not believe that bias will be introduced.
Conn (1991)
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: “the patients were randomly selected”
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: “using a sealed envelope technique and computer-generated randomization”
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)	Low risk	Quote: “double-blinded”, “The placebo and the propranolol tablets were identical in appearance”
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)	Low risk	Quote: “double-blinded”, “the patients were examined on each visit by a nurse and the postdoctoral fellow assigned to the study”
Incomplete outcome data addressed (attrition bias)	Unclear risk	Not described
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Both potential efficacy and complications were reported. Review authors do not believe that bias will be introduced
Cales (1999)
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: “patients were randomized”
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: “by the opaque sealed envelope method”
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)	Low risk	Quote: “double-blinded”, “Patients and physicians were unaware of the treatment”
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)	Low risk	Quote: “double-blinded”, “Patients and physicians were unaware of the treatment”
Incomplete outcome data addressed (attrition bias)	High risk	Quote: “In the propranolol group, 41 patients were lost to follow-up, compared with 32 in the placebo group”
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Both potential efficacy and complications were reported. Review authors do not believe that bias will be introduced
Merkel (2004)
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: “A total of 83 patients were randomized to”
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: “Randomization was generated by tables of random numbers, stratified by participating centers, prepared at the University of Padua, and administered by opaque sealed and consecutively numbered envelopes containing randomization”
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)	Low risk	Quote: “The single-blind study design was chosen”
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)	High risk	Quote: “The single-blind study design was chosen”
Incomplete outcome data addressed (attrition bias)	High risk	Quote: “11 patients randomized to nadolol and 10 patients randomized to placebo were lost to follow-up”
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Both potential efficacy and complications were reported. Review authors do not believe that bias will be introduced
Groszmann (2005)
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: “patients were randomly assigned”
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: “The randomization code was generated by computer for each participating center”
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)	Low risk	Quote: “The study was an investigator-initiated, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial conducted at four sites”
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)	Low risk	Quote: “double-blinded”, “To maintain study blinding, the patient’s heart rate was measured by the study nurse and not by the investigators”
Incomplete outcome data addressed (attrition bias)	Low risk	Quote: “The remaining 277 were excluded for the following reasons: …6 were lost to follow-up…” Patients who were lost to follow-up were excluded from the final analysis
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Both potential efficacy and complications were reported. Review authors do not believe that bias will be introduced
Sarin (2012)
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: “Patients were randomly assigned”
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: “All randomizations were done by computer-generated random numbers”
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)	Low risk	Quote: “single-blind”
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)	High risk	Quote: “single-blind”
Incomplete outcome data addressed (attrition bias)	Low risk	Quote: “Another 14 patients were excluded because they dropped out before the completion of 6 months of study” Patients who were lost to follow-up were excluded from the final analysis
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Both potential efficacy and complications were reported. Review authors do not believe that bias will be introduced