Rowbotham 2005.

Study characteristics
Methods	Design: parallel Duration: 6 weeks Assessment: baseline and post‐intervention Country: USA
Participants	Pain condition: post‐herpetic neuralgia Population: people aged > 40 with post‐herpetic neuralgia Minimum pain intensity: no Inclusion criteria Over the age of 40 were eligible if they had well‐established post‐herpetic neuralgia (defined as pain present > 3 months after healing of the skin rash) Exclusion criteria Any pain condition with greater severity than the post‐herpetic neuralgia. Depression included and measured at baseline by a psychologist Total participants randomised: 47 Age in years (mean, range): 72 (40‐84) Gender: 27/47 were female Pain duration in months (mean, range): 42 (3‐168)
Interventions	Desipramine 25‐150 mg n = 15 TCA Flexible dose Mean dose taken: 93 mg/day Amitriptyline 25‐150 mg n = 17 TCA Flexible dose Mean dose taken: 77 mg/day Fluoxetine 10‐60 mg n = 15 SSRI Flexible dose Mean dose taken: 44 mg/day
Outcomes	Withdrawal
Missing data methods	ITT but no methods
Funding source	Non‐pharmaceutical: supported by NIH program project grant NINDS 21445 and NINDS K24 NS02164
Conflicts of interest	NR
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Randomisation methods NR
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Allocation procedures NR
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Double‐blind, double‐dummy design
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Self‐reported outcomes by blinded participants
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	Says modified ITT but doesn't mention imputation method. Higher attrition in the fluoxetine arm than other arms Attrition Total: 9/47 (19.2%) Desipramine 25‐150 mg: 2/15 (13.3%) Amitriptyline 25‐150 mg: 2/17 (11.8%) Fluoxetine 10‐60 mg: 5/15 (33.3%)
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	No protocol or trial registry found
Other bias	Low risk	No other sources of bias were identified.