Dmowski 1989a.

Study characteristics
Methods	Trial design: "Open‐label, randomised, prospective study"
Participants	Participants: 36 women eligible, 36 were randomised and 29 were analysed Mean age: 30.8 ± 0.6 (SE) (range, 27 to 38 years) Inclusion criteria:  Laparoscopically diagnosed endometriosis within 3 months before enrolment in the study No hormonal treatment 8 months prior to study entry Exclusion criteria: not stated Setting: United States of America Timing: Not stated
Interventions	Buserelin 400 μg three times a day (1200 μg/day) IN for 6 months (n = 10) versus Buserelin 200 mcg daily SC for 6 months (n = 9) versus Danazol 200 mg four times a day (800 mg/day) PO for 6 months (n = 10)
Outcomes	Relief of overall pain: dysmenorrhoea, dyspareunia, pelvic pain Change in rAFS scores Adverse effects
Notes	Intention‐to‐treat analysis: not stated Sample size calculation: not stated Funding: supported in part by a grant from Hoechst‐Roussel Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Note previous version: Authors contacted regarding allocation concealment
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	2:1 buserelin: danazol. No further details of method used to generate the randomisation sequence were provided. "Those who were randomised into Buserelin were given an option of SC injections or IN sprays of the drug".
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No details of method used to conceal allocation were provided.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	No details provided of blinding of participants or personnel
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	No details provided of blinding of outcome assessment
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Detail for attrition: 3 in SC buserelin, 2 in IN buserelin and 2 in danazol group. 2 withdrew for family reasons, 3 were non‐compliant, 1 had severe emotional side effects on IN buserelin and 1 was allergic to danazol.
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