Jalalian 2015.

Study characteristics
Methods	Study design Parallel RCT Study dates Duration of follow‐up: 2 months Time frame: not reported
Participants	Study characteristics Setting: single centre (hospital of Tehran University of Medical Science) Country: Iran Inclusion criteria: maintenance HD patients Exclusion criteria: not reported Baseline characteristics Number (analysed/randomised): overall (not reported/64) Mean age ± SD (years): not reported Sex (M/F): not reported Dialysis type: HD Dialysis vintage (years) (mean ± SD): not reported Comorbidities CVD: not reported Diabetes: not reported Hypertension: not reported Depression (clinician diagnosis): not reported
Interventions	Intervention classification Non‐pharmacological intervention Indication: study targeting fatigue Intervention group Lavender and sweet orange essence Control group No intervention Co‐interventions Not reported
Outcomes	Outcomes reported Fatigue outcome measures used: validation data available Fatigue Rhoten fatigue scale: assessed before and after the treatment HRQoL KDQOL‐SF: assessed before and after the treatment
Notes	Additional information Funding: not reported Conflicts of interest/disclosures: not reported Trial registration identification number: not reported A priori published protocol: not reported Abstract‐only publication
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Sequence generation methods were not reported in sufficient detail to permit judgement
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Method of allocation concealment was not reported in sufficient detail to permit judgement
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Not reported. However, interventions were different and participants and/or investigators could be aware of the treatment assigned
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	Quote: "Data were collected using demographic questionnaire, Rhoten Fatigue Scale and Kidney Disease Quality of Life Short Form (KDQOLSF)." Comment: The outcomes were assessed with an appropriate measure, without differences between groups. However, subjective measures were used, it was not stated whether outcomes were assessed without knowledge of treatment allocation, and knowledge of treatment assignment may have influenced reporting. Participant beliefs about the superiority/inferiority of either intervention could have influenced their assessment of the outcome, but there was no evidence that this was likely. However, other subjective outcome were reported
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	The number of patients who completed the study was not clearly stated. It was unclear if there was evidence that the results were not biased by missing outcome data
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	Information about the protocol and the statistical analysis plan were not reported. It was not reported if multiple eligible outcome measurements (scales and time points) were pre‐specified. It was unclear if the reported approach to analysing this outcome was pre‐specified or influenced by the results. Information related to fatigue were not reported in sufficient detail to permit judgment. All outcomes that should be addressed (fatigue, cardiovascular disease, and death) were not reported
Other bias	Unclear risk	No data were available to assess the possible imbalance between groups. Funding and conflicts of interest were not reported