Clinical and Preclinical Systematic Review of Astragalus Membranaceus for Viral Myocarditis

Table 6

Risk of bias of animal studies.

Study	A	B	C	D	E	F	G	H	I	J	Total
Zhang et al. 2017A	+	—	—	—	—	+	—	+	+	+	5
Li et al. 2016B	?	—	—	+	—	+	—	+	?	+	4
Jiang 2013	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	+	?	+	2
Wang et al. 2011	?	—	—	+	—	—	—	+	?	+	3
Cai et al. 2009	?	—	—	+	—	—	—	+	+	+	4
Zhang et al. 2009	?	—	—	—	—	—	—	+	?	+	2
Li et al. 2007	?	—	—	—	—	—	—	+	+	+	3
Wu et al. 2007	?	—	—	—	—	+	—	+	?	+	3
Yao et al. 2007	?	—	—	—	—	—	—	+	?	+	2
Chen et al. 2006	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	+	?	+	2
Zhang et al. 2006A	?	—	—	—	—	—	—	+	?	+	2
Guan et al. 2005	?	—	—	—	—	—	—	+	?	+	2
Liu et al. 2004	+	—	—	+	—	—	—	+	?	+	4
Liu et al. 2003	?	+	—	—	—	—	—	+	+	+	4
Li et al. 2003	?	+	—	—	—	+	—	+	?	+	4
Liu et al. 2002	?	—	—	—	—	—	—	+	?	+	2

Note: A: sequence generation; B: baseline characteristics; C: allocation concealment; D: random housing and animal welfare; E: blinding of caregivers and/or investigators; F: random outcome assessment; G: blinding of outcome assessor; H: complete outcome data; I: selective outcome reporting; J: other sources of bias. “+” indicates low risk of bias; “-” indicates high risk of bias; and “?” indicates an unclear risk of bias.