Efficacy and Safety of Ultrasound-Guided Radiofrequency Treatment for Chronic Pain in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Table 4

Evaluation of bias for nonrandomized studies.

Risk of bias criterion	Criterion	Djibilian Fucci et al. [26]	Ibrahim Aly et al. [27]	Santana Pineda et al. [28]	Erdem et al. [29]	Ahmed and Arora [30]
Selection bias	Does the design or analysis control account for important confounding and modifying variables through matching, stratification, multivariable analysis, or other approaches?	✗	✓	✓	✓	✓
Performance bias	Did researchers rule out any impact from a concurrent intervention or an unintended exposure that might bias results?	✓	✓	✓	✗	✗
	Did the study maintain fidelity to the intervention protocol?	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Attrition bias	If attrition (overall or differential nonresponse, dropout, loss to follow-up, or exclusion of participants) was a concern, were missing data handled appropriately (e.g., intention-to-treat analysis and imputation)?	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Detection bias	Were the outcome assessors blinded to the intervention or exposure status of participants?	—	—	—	✗	✗
	Were interventions/exposures assessed/defined using valid and reliable measures implemented consistently across all study participants?	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
	Were outcomes assessed/defined using valid and reliable measures implemented consistently across all study participants?	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
	Were confounding variables assessed using valid and reliable measures implemented consistently across all study participants?	✗	✓	✓	✓	✓
Reporting bias	Were the potential outcomes prespecified by the researchers? Were all prespecified outcomes reported?	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓