Burry 1992.

Study characteristics
Methods	Trial design: "Multi‐centre, double‐blind study"
Participants	Participants: 169 women eligible; 169 were randomised and 147 analysed for efficacy. Mean age: not stated Inclusion criteria: Laparoscopically diagnosed endometriosis Exclusion criteria: not stated Setting: United States of America Timing: not stated
Interventions	Nafarelin 400 μg daily IN for 6 months (n = 111) versus Danazol 600 mg daily PO for 6 months (n = 58)
Outcomes	Adverse effects Quality of life score  Improvement of most troublesome symptom Change in laparoscopic scores
Notes	Intention‐to‐treat analysis: not stated Sample size calculation: not stated Funding: not stated Note previous version: Need more info on randomisation and participants and raw data for quality of life. Authors contacted, awaiting response
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	The randomisation procedure assigned two of every three patients to receive nafarelin, 400 μg daily (n = 111), and one of three patients to danazol, 600 mg daily (n = 58). No further details were provided of method used to generate the randomisation sequence.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No details were provided of method used to conceal treatment group allocation.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Low risk	The study was "double‐blind". No further details were provided on the method of blinding.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	The study was "double‐blind". No further details were provided on the method of blinding.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Sufficient details for attrition: Side effects n = 6 (N) n = 3 (D) Elevated liver enzyme n = 1 (D) Administrative reasons n = 12
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	The study protocol was not available but it was clear that the published reports included all expected outcomes, including those that were prespecified.
Other bias	Low risk	No other risk of bias detected