Murakami 2015.

Study characteristics
Methods	Design: parallel Duration: 14 weeks Assessment: baseline and post‐intervention Country: Japan
Participants	Pain condition: fibromyalgia Population: adults aged 20‐75 with fibromyalgia Minimum pain intensity: ≥ 4 on 0‐10 scale Inclusion criteria Outpatients aged between 20 and 75 years who met the ACR 1990 criteria for fibromyalgia Pain intensity of ≥ 4 on 0‐10 scale Exclusion criteria Severe or unstable disease, psychiatric disorders other than major depressive disorder within the last year Total participants randomised: 393 Age in years (mean, SD): 48.7 (11.9) Gender: 321/393 were female Pain duration in years (mean): 5.6
Interventions	Placebo n = 197 Inert Identical appearance and matched dosing schedule Duloxetine 60 mg n = 196 SNRI Forced titration to fixed dose
Outcomes	Pain intensity Mood Sleep Quality of life Physical function PGIC AEs SAEs Withdrawal
Missing data methods	ITT with LOCF, MMRM, and sensitivity analyses using BOCF and WOCF
Funding source	Pharmaceutical: Shionogi & Co. Ltd., Eli Lilly Japan K.K., and Eli Lilly & Company provided funding for the study
Conflicts of interest	HM and TO are employees of Shionogi & Co. Ltd. LA is an employee of Eli Lilly Japan K.K. MM, KO, and KN have provided consultancy services and MM and KO received compensation from Shionogi & Co. Ltd. for their participation in this study. MM, KO, and KN did not receive any compensation for their input into this study. The authors confirm that there are no non‐financial competing interests to declare in relation to this article.
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Patients were assigned randomly to receive duloxetine or placebo in a 1:1 ratio, using a web‐based patient registration system (ACRONET Corp., Tokyo, Japan) with a stochastic minimisation procedure.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Allocation procedure not specified
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Double‐blind, study drugs had identical appearance, packaging, and labelling, matched dosing schedule
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Self‐reported outcomes from blinded participants
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Although there was attrition, sensitivity analyses of the primary outcomes with LOCF, BOCF, and WOCF showed no signficiant differences. Attrition Total: 78/393 (19.9%) Placebo: 48/198 (24.4%) Duloxetine 60 mg: 30/196 (15.3%)
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All outcomes listed prospectively on clinicaltrials.gov
Other bias	Low risk	No other sources of bias were identified.