References	Risk of bias domains (a)
	Key Criteria			Other Criterion					Tier (b)
	Randomization	Exposure characterization	Outcome assessment	Allocation concealment	Blinding	Attrition	Selective reporting	Other threats to internal validity
Children and adolescents
Lewis et al. 2013	++	−−	++	++	+	+	++	+	2
Lactating women
Hollis & Wagner 2004	+	+	NR	NR	NR	−−	++	–	2
Hollis et al. 2011	++	–	–	+	+	–	++	+	2
Wagner et al. 2006	++	+	NR	++	++	−−	++	+	2
General adult population
Aloia et al. 2013	++	–	++	++	++	–	++	++	2
Aloia et al. 2018	++	+	++	NR	NR	–	++	+	2
Billington et al. 2020	++	–	+	++	+	+	++	++	2
Ceglia et al. 2013	NR	NR	++	+	+	+	++	+	2
Gallagher et al. 2012, (c)	++	++	++	++	+	+	++	++	1
Gallagher et al. 2013, (c)	++	+	+	+	+	+	++	+	1
Johnson et al. 2022	++	+	–	+	++	++	+	+	2
Mastaglia et al. 2006	+	+	–	–	–	+	++	+	2
Rafii et al. 2019	NR	+	–	−−	−−	–	+	–	3
Rorie et al. 2014	++	+	NR	++	+	+	++	+	2
Vieth et al. 2001	+	+	+	++	+	–	+	+	1

^(a)Expert judgement was translated into a rating scale for each question to be answered as follows: (++): definitely low RoB; (+): probably low RoB; (NR): not reported; (−): probably high RoB; (−−): definitively high RoB.

^(b)The individual rating for each question was combined by an algorithm and translated to an overall tier of reliability for each individual study (RoB tier 1: low RoB; RoB tier 2: moderate RoB; RoB tier 3: high RoB).

^(c)The publications were based on the same intervention study but represent different study populations.