The evidence base showed a number of methodological inadequacies such as the limited use of power calculations and poor or absent blinding of both patients and assessors, possibly giving rise to assessor bias.
However, the evidence base presented with a number of methodological inadequacies such as the limited use of power calculations and poor or absent blinding of both patients and assessors can give rise to assessor bias.
Accordingly, there are two fundamental types of methodological inadequacy in current epidemiologic investigations of interaction.
Furthermore, indirect evidence can be more reliable than direct evidence in some cases, for instance, when direct evidence is biased due to the methodological inadequacies of trials that compare the treatments directly [1].
The methodological inadequacies of some studies have been described (Salsman et al, 2004).
Much of this research, however, suffers from notable methodological inadequacies, which include lack of randomization, small sample size, and short duration, among others.
Apart from methodological inadequacies, the discrepancy of the results of previous studies might be attributed to the specific kinematic and dynamic conditions associated with each individual exercise.
Methodological inadequacies, lack of originality or focus on local issues could be reasons for rejecting such manuscripts if they were to be resubmitted.
Due to the scarcity of papers included (seven), significant heterogeneity of CM interventions and effects studied, and the methodological inadequacies, no conclusions on the effects of CM in cancer patient care can be made.
