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