Introduction to Non Randomized Comparative

The risk-of-bias assessment will be done using the MINORS tool for the non-randomized comparative studies, and The Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool will be used for randomized control trials.

We included 34 full-text publications of 10 randomized controlled trials, 13 non-randomized comparative studies, and 5 ongoing randomized controlled trials.

Results 11 studies (5 RCTs and 6 non-randomized comparative studies) involving a total of 582 patients (MIPO-290, ORIF-292) meeting our inclusion criteria were included in the study.

A prospective, non-randomized comparative study was conducted to compare the distribution of oculomotor and visual alterations in children with neurodevelopmental disorders and healthy children without such disorders.

Eligible studies included individually (RCTs) or cluster randomized trials or non-randomized comparative studies that investigated the effectiveness of interventions to promote physical activity in nursing home residents and their impact on the ability to perform activities of daily living.

A systematic literature search was performed in January 2019 including non-randomized comparative studies and randomized controlled trials (RCT).

We included randomized and non-randomized comparative studies.

METHODS This consecutive, retrospective, single-center, non-randomized comparative trial included patients with PAD at the femoral, popliteal, and/or tibial level, at any clinical stage, if they were candidates for endovascular revascularization.

A prospective non-randomized comparative study with 52 patients has been performed.

PATIENTS AND METHODS In this prospective non-randomized comparative study we analyzed 150 patients (age 65±14, 69 women, 81 men) undergoing diagnostic colonoscopy at a single endoscopy center in Germany from June to October 2020.

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched (2004–2019) to identify randomized control and non-randomized comparative studies.

Methods: This retrospective non-randomized comparative case series included 262 eyes (163 with macular edema) of 177 patients with PDR.

Non-randomized comparative cohort study with data collected retrospectively from an existing database compiled by a single surgeon operating in Sydney, Australia from 2007 to 2019.

A prospective non-randomized comparative interventional study was carried out at two teaching hospitals in Mosul city from January 2020 to January 2021.

Patients and Methods A prospective non-randomized comparative study was carried out in Al Watany Eye Hospital and Ain Shams University Hospital, Cairo, Egypt; 250 eyes with senile nuclear cataract (NC) were included and classified into two main groups, FLACS and QCP groups.

Studies were included if they were English-language randomized controlled, non-randomized comparative, or prospective cohort trials, tested neuromuscular and/or balance-focused warmup interventions among basketball players, and assessed at least one type of lower extremity injury as a primary outcome.

METHODS Prospective, non-randomized comparative study conducted at LV Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad, India.

In this study, we sought to validate the recent positive findings from the randomised clinical trial RECOVERY and to evaluate the challenges in the analysis and interpretation of non-randomized comparative effectiveness studies in Covid-19.

METHODS In this non-randomized comparative cross-sectional study, 43 healthy eyes, 68 POAG eyes, and 57 PXG eyes were included.

Level II, non-randomized comparative study.

Methods: This study was an open-label, non-randomized comparative clinical trial that was conducted at Dr.

Inclusion criteria were: (1) randomized or non-randomized comparative studies; (2) publication in English; (3) participants of all age groups; (4) participants free of any medical condition or injury; (5) cluster set intervention; (6) comparison intervention utilizing a traditional set configuration; (7) intervention length ≥ three weeks and (8) at least one measure of changes in strength/force/torque, power, velocity, hypertrophy or muscular endurance.

A retrospective, non-randomized comparative study involving 2 series of patients who underwent 2 different scleral fixation techniques of Carlevale lens was performed.

Prospective non-randomized comparative trial.

Methods: This is a prospective consecutive non-randomized comparative cohort study.

Methods: We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science database, for high-quality, non-randomized comparative studies.