Benefits of Equine-Assisted Therapies in People with Multiple Sclerosis: A Systematic Review
Table 4
Risk of bias assessment.
Study
Item 1
Item 2
Item 3
Item 4
Item 5
Item 6
Item 7
Item 8
Total score
Study design
Participants representativeness
Equivalence of comparison groups
Moraes (2021)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
7/8
Moraes (2020)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
7/8
Muñoz-Lasa (2019)
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
5/8
Vermöhlen (2017)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
7/8
Frevel (2015)
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
7/8
Lindroth (2015)
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
3/8
Menezes (2013)
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
6/8
Muñoz-Lasa (2011)
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
6/8
Silkwood-Sherer (2007)
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
6/8
Hammer (2005)
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
3/8
Item 1: cohort. Item 2: control or comparison group. Item 3: pre-/postintervention data. Item 4: random assignment of participants to the intervention. Item 5: random selection of participants for assessment. Item 6: follow-up rate of 80% or more. Item 7: comparison groups equivalent on sociodemographics. Item 8: comparison groups equivalent at baseline on outcome measures.
