Systematic Reviews
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2017.
World J Orthop. Oct 18, 2017; 8(10): 798-808
Published online Oct 18, 2017. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v8.i10.798
Table 2 Modified Coleman Methodology Score
Score
Part A: Only 1 score to be given for each section
Number of study patients
> 6010
41-607
20-404
< 20, not stated0
Mean follow-up (mo)
> 245
12-242
< 12, not stated or unclear0
Number of different surgical procedures included in each reported outcome
110
> 1, but > 90% of patients undergoing the 1 procedure7
Not stated, unclear, or < 90% of subjects undergoing the 1 procedure0
Type of study
Randomized controlled trial15
Prospective cohort study10
Retrospective cohort study0
Diagnostic certainty (MRI)
In all5
In > 80%3
In < 80%0
Description of surgical procedure given
Adequate (technique stated and necessary details of that type of procedure provided)5
Fair (technique only stated without elaboration)3
Inadequate, not stated, or unclear0
Description of postoperative rehabilitation
Well described (ROM, WB, and sport)10
Not adequately described (2 items between ROM, WB, and sport)5
Protocol not reported0
Part B: Scores may be given for each option in each of the 3 sections if applicable
Outcome criteria
Outcome measures clearly defined2
Timing of outcome assessment clearly stated (e.g., at best outcome after surgery or follow-up)2
Objective, subjective, and imaging criteria6
2 items between objective, subjective, and imaging criteria4
Objective, subjective, or radiological criteria2
Procedure for assessing outcomes
Patients recruited (results not taken from surgeons' files)5
Investigator independent of surgeon4
Written assessment3
Completion of assessment by patinets themselves with minimal investigator assistance3
Description of patient selection process
Selection criteria reported and unbiased5
Recruitment rate reported
> 80%5
< 80%3
Eligible patients not included in study satisfactorily accounted for or 100% recruitment5