Table 1 Methodological quality scores using PEDro scale.

Reference	Items in PEDro Scale*
	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	Score†
Neurological conditions
Ahlborg et al (2006)‡	✓	✗	✓	✗	✗	✗	✓	✗	✗	✓	4
Arias et al (2009)§	✗	✓	✓	✓	✗	✓	✓	✗	✓	✓	7
Broekmans et al. (2010)‡	✓	✗	✓	✗	✗	✗	✓	✗	✓	✓	5
Brogardh et al. (2010)||	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	-
Ebersbach et al (2008)‡	✓	✓	✓	✗	✗	✗	✗	✗	✓	✓	5
Haas et al (2006a)‡	✓	✗	✓	✗	✗	✓	✓	✗	✓	✓	6
Haas et al (2006b)§	✗	✗	✓	✗	✗	✗	✗	✗	✓	✓	3
Jackson et al (2008)‡	✓	✗	✓	✗	✗	✓	✗	✗	✓	✓	5
Ness et al (2009)||	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	-
Schuhfried et al (2005)‡	✓	✗	✓	✗	✗	✓	✓	✗	✓	✓	6
Schyns et al (2009)‡	✓	✓	✗	✗	✗	✓	✗	✗	✗	✓	4
Tihanyi et al (2007)‡	✓	✓	✓	✗	✗	✗	✓	✗	✓	✓	6
Turbanski et al (2005)§	✗	✗	✓	✗	✗	✗	✗	✗	✓	✗	2
van Nes et al (2004)§	✗	✗	✓	✗	✗	✗	✓	✗	✓	✓	4
van Nes et al (2006)‡	✓	✓	✓	✗	✗	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	8
Mean (SD)											5.00 (1.63)
Musculoskeletal conditions
Alentorn-Geli et al (2008)‡	✓	✗	✓	✗	✗	✓	✓	✗	✓	✓	6
Alentorn-Geli et al (2009)‡	✓	✗	✓	✗	✗	✗	✓	✗	✓	✓	5
Gusi et al (2010)‡	✓	✗	✓	✗	✗	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	7
Johnson et al (2010)‡	✓	✗	✓	✗	✗	✗	✗	✗	✗	✓	3
Moezy et al (2008)‡	✓	✗	✓	✗	✗	✗	✓	✗	✓	✓	5
Rittweger et al (2002)‡	✓	✗	✓	✗	✗	✗	✗	✗	✓	✓	4
Trans et al (2009)‡	✓	✓	✓	✗	✗	✗	✗	✓	✓	✓	6
Mean (SD)											5.57 (1.27)
Metabolic conditions
Baum et al (2007)§	✓	✗	✗	✗	✗	✗	✓	✓	✓	✓	5
Iwamoto et al (2005)‡	✓	✗	✓	✗	✗	✗	✗	✗	✓	✓	4
Rietschel et al (2008)||	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	-
Roth et al (2008)||	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	o	-
Mean (SD)											4.50 (0.71)
Total Mean (SD)											5.14 (1.46)

Explenation of Items of PEDro scale: 1 Random allocation, 2 Concealed allocation, 3 Baseline comparability, 4 Blind subjects, 5 Blind therapists, 6 Blind assessors, 7 Adequate follow-up, 8 intention-to-treat analysis, 9 Between group comparisons, 10 Point estimates and variability Criteria of PEDro scale: fulfilled (ü), not fulfilled (û), study not assessed (o) Scores retrieved from PEDro site Scored by the first author Could not be assessed with PEDro scale because of their design