From: Peer counselling as an approach to improve complementary feeding practices: a narrative review
Selected RCT studies strengths and limitations (n = 3) | |||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Studies | Was true randomisation used for assignment of participants to treatment groups | Was allocation to treatment groups concealed | Were treatment groups similar at the baseline | Were participants blind to treatment assignment | Were those delivering treatment blind to treatment assignment | Were outcomes assessors blind to treatment assignment | Were treatment groups treated identically other than the intervention of interest | Was follow up complete and if not, were differences between groups in terms of their follow up adequately described and analysed | Were participants analysed in the groups to which they were randomised | Were outcomes measured in the same way for treatment groups | Were outcomes measured in a reliable way | Was appropriate statistical analysis used | Was the trial design appropriate, and any deviations from the standard RCT design (individual randomisation, parallel groups) accounted for in the conduct and analysis of the trial |
Ara et al. 2019 [28] | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | Not clear | Yes | Yes | Yes (except cognitive testing) | Yes | Yes |
Aboud et al. 2011 [27] | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | Not clear | Yes | Yes | Not clear | Not clear | Yes |
Vandana et al. 2014 [30] | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | yes | Yes | Yes |