Max 1992.

Study characteristics
Methods	Design: cross‐over Duration: each cross‐over period was 6 weeks Assessment: baseline and post‐cross‐over period Country: USA
Participants	Pain condition: diabetic peripheral neuropathy Population: type 1 or 2 diabetic adults with diabetic peripheral neuropathy Minimum pain intensity: no Inclusion criteria Daily pain of at least moderate severity, the quality and location of which were consistent with the peripheral neuropathy Exclusion criteria Other pain as severe as the diabetic peripheral neuropathy Depression Cardiovascular conditions Total participants randomised: 54 Age in years (median, range): 58 (20‐84) Gender: 21/54 were female Pain duration in years (median, range): 3 (0.5‐12)
Interventions	Desipramine 12.5‐150 mg TCA Forced titration to highest tolerated dose Mean dose 111 mg/day (SD 39) Amitriptyline 12.5‐150 mg TCA Forced titration to highest tolerated dose Mean dose 105 mg/day (SD 37)
Outcomes	Pain intensity AEs
Missing data methods	Completer‐only analysis
Funding source	NR
Conflicts of interest	NR
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Randomisation methods not specified
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Allocation procedures not specified
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	States double‐blind but no information regarding procedures e.g. study drug appearance
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Self‐reported outcomes from participants, but unsure of blinding process
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	Completer analysis only Attrition Total: 16/54 (29.6%) Attrition per arm NR
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	No protocol or trial registration found
Other bias	Unclear risk	Complicated trial design between 2 studies. Of the 54 participants in the desipramine vs amitriptyline study only 29 were randomised into it.