Boothe et al. [11]
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
Low/moderate (11)
|
| | | | | | |
Primary investigator could potentially influence the treatment.
| |
Chung et al. [24]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
Moderate/high (17)
|
| | | | | | |
Research support but unclear if it was financial.
| |
Cunningham et al. [29]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
Moderate/high (18)
|
| | | | | | |
Conference abstract
| |
Dewey et al. [18]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
Moderate/high (18)
|
| | | | | | |
Less than 6 months study duration.
| |
Dewey et al. [19]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
Moderate/high (17)
|
EMEA pseudo-trial [13]
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
Low/moderate (12)
|
| | | | | | |
The follow up assessment of efficacy was not blinded. Different drug formulations were used compared to the final formulation.
| |
Govendir et al. [21]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
3
|
High (19)
|
| | | | | | |
A few cases were treated by the referring vets. The study had financial support. Less than 6 months study duration.
| |
Heynold et al. [36]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
3
|
High (19)
|
| | | | | | |
The study had financial support but unclear if it influenced the results. Less than 6 months study duration.
| |
Kiviranta [17]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
Moderate/high (17)
|
Löscher et al. [26]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
3
|
High (19)
|
| | | | | | |
Part of the study was retrospective
| |
Morton et al. [31]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
3
|
High (19)
|
| | | | | | |
A few cases were treated by the referring vets. The study had financial support but unclear if it influenced the results.
| |
Muñana et al. [12]
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
Low/moderate (10)
|
| | | | | | |
The study had financial support but unclear if it influenced the results.
| |
Nafe [25]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
3
|
High (19)
|
| | | | | | |
Less than 6 months study duration.
| |
Pearce [32]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
Moderate/high (18)
|
Platt et al. [22]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
Moderate/high (18)
|
| | | | | | |
Less than 6 months study duration.
| |
Podell et al. [33]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
3
|
High (19)
|
| | | | | | |
Retrospective nature of study.
| |
Rieck et al. [27]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
3
|
High (19)
|
| | | | | | |
Part of the study was retrospective
| |
Ruehlmann et al. [35]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
Moderate/high (18)
|
| | | | | | |
Part of the study was retrospective. No clarification of statistical analysis
| |
Schwartz-Porsche [28]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
Moderate/high (18)
|
Schwartz-Porsche et al. [15]
|
2
|
2
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
Moderate/high (16)
|
| | | | | | |
The study had research support but unclear if it influenced the results. No clarification of statistical analysis
| |
Schwartz-Porsche et al. [30]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
Moderate/high (17)
|
Steinberg [23]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
Moderate/high (18)
|
| | | | | | |
Conference abstract
| |
Tipold et al. [14]
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
Low/moderate (11)
|
| | | | | | |
Statistical analysis was conducted before unblindingonly on the per-protocol population and not on the intent-to-treat population. A high and unbalanced population of animals was excluded. The reasons for exclusion were in many cases treatmet-related (post-randomization bias). Conflict of interest about imepitoin reported.
| |
Trepanier et al. [34]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
Moderate/high (18)
|
| | | | | | |
Some samples were submitted by the referring vets.
| |
Volk et al. [16]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
Moderate/high (18)
|
| | | | | | |
The study had financial support but unclear if it influenced the results. Part of the study was retrospective
| |
Von Klopmann et al. [20]
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
3
|
High (19)
|
| | | | | | |
Less than 6 months study duration.
| |