448 Review of critical appraisal tools for NHPs 40. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996;17:1–12. 41. Cho MK, Bero LA. Instruments for assessing the quality of drug studies published in the medical literature. JAMA 1994;272:101–4. 42. Oxman AD, Sackett DL, Guyatt GH. Users’ guides to the medical literature. I. how to get started. the evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA 1993;270:2093–5. 43. Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, Cook DJ. Users’ guides to the medical literature. II. how to use an article about therapy or prevention. A. are the results of the study valid? evidence-based medicine working group. JAMA 1993;270:2598–601. 44. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes JA, Altman DG. Empirical evidence of bias. dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 1995;273:408–12. 45. Alderson P, Green S, Higgins JPT (eds) Cochrane reviewers’ handbook 4.2.2, 2004. 46. Juni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. Br Med J 2001;323:42–6. 47. Meinert CL. Questions, & factors to consider when reading a report from a clinical trial. In: Meinert C (ed). Clinical Trials: Design, Conduct, and Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986, 272–6. 48. Linde K, Jonas WB, Melchart D, Willich S. The methodological quality of randomized controlled trials of homeopathy, herbal medicines and acupuncture. Int J Epidemiol 2001;30:526–31. Received May 23, 2007; accepted December 21, 2007