Huang 2020a.

Study characteristics
Methods	Study design: randomised controlled trial Study grouping: parallel group
Participants	Baseline characteristics Balint intervention Age (mean ± SD): 24 ± 0.90 Sex (N (% female)): 12 (67%) Sample size: 18 Years of experience (mean ± SD): NR Wait‐list control group Age (mean ± SD): 23 ± 0.92 Sex (N (% female)): 13 (72%) Sample size: 18 Years of experience (mean ± SD): NR Overall Age (mean ± SD): NR Sex (N (% female)): NR Sample size: 36 Years of experience (mean ± SD): NR Included criteria: NR Excluded criteria: NR Pretreatment: there were no significant differences between the two groups for age and gender Compliance rate: 100% Response rate: all residents invited voluntarily participated (100% response rate). Type of healthcare worker: residents
Interventions	Intervention characteristics Balint intervention Type of the intervention: Intervention type 1 ‐ to focus one’s attention on the experience of stress Description of the intervention: Each participant in the discussion groups could volunteer to report his/her case. The group leader facilitated the entire Balint session. Discussions were largely case‐focused and highlighted the emotions and attitudes aroused by participants from the presentation. The number of sessions: 10 sessions Duration of each session on average: 1 hour Duration of the entire intervention: 6 months Duration of the entire intervention short vs long: Long Intervention deliverer: Group leaders formally trained and qualified by the “Asia‐link Program” Intervention form: Group (face‐2‐face) Wait‐list control group Type of the intervention: Wait‐list control Description of the intervention: NA The number of sessions: NA Duration of each session on average: NA Duration of the entire intervention: NA Duration of the entire intervention short vs long: NA Intervention deliverer : NA Intervention form: NA
Outcomes	Maslach Burnout Inventory human services survey ‐ Emotional Exhaustion Outcome type: ContinuousOutcome Maslach Burnout Inventory human services survey ‐ Depersonalisation Outcome type: ContinuousOutcome Maslach Burnout Inventory human services survey ‐ Personal accomplishment Outcome type: ContinuousOutcome
Identification	Sponsorship source: NR Country: China Setting: Hospital Comments: NR Authors name: Lei Huang Institution: Department of Psychiatry, Tongji Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China, Medical Education Division, Tongji Hospital, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China Email: wuwy@tongji.edu.cn Address: NR Time period: 2016
Notes	MBI‐EE Included in analysis 1.2
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Quote: "Following consent and the completion of the first round of assessment completion, the 36 residents were randomly assigned to the intervention (n = 18) or the control group (n = 18)." Sequence generation process insufficiently described
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Difficult to judge whether participants and/or investigators could possible foresee assignment. However, it is assumed that randomization was performed in one go and that participants and/or investigators could not foresee assignment.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Participants were not blinded.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	Participants were not blinded whereas outcomes are self‐reported.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	No loss to follow‐up.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	No trial registration or no study protocol reported. No indication of selective reporting.
Other bias	Low risk	No indication of other sources of bias reported.