Leski 1979.

Study characteristics
Methods	Study design Parallel RCT Study dates Duration of follow‐up: 4 weeks Time frame: not reported
Participants	Study characteristics Setting: single centre Country: Switzerland Inclusion criteria: HD patients Exclusion criteria: not reported Baseline characteristics Number (analysed/randomised): overall (not reported/10) Mean age ± SD (years): overall (53.1 ± 9.0) Sex (M/F): overall (5/5) Dialysis type: HD Mean dialysis vintage ± SD (years): overall (3.2 ± 2.3) Comorbidities CVD: not reported Diabetes: not reported Hypertension: not reported Depression (clinician diagnosis): not reported
Interventions	Intervention classification Pharmacological intervention Indication: study targeting fatigue Intervention group Dialysis sessions with dialysate containing glucose 400 mg/100 mL Control group Dialysis sessions with dialysate of the same composition but without glucose Co‐interventions Every patient had 3 dialysis sessions/week
Outcomes	Outcomes reported Fatigue outcome measures used: validation data available Fatigue Questionnaire (evaluated on a 3‐point system, 0, +, + +): assessed post dialysis Glycaemia: assessed in all samples during the study period Immunoreactive insulin: measured in 44/120 sessions BP: monitoring during the study period Body weight: monitoring during the study period Headache Questionnaire (evaluated on a 3‐point system, 0, +, + +): assessed during and after dialysis Leg cramps Questionnaire (evaluated on a 3‐point system, 0, +, + +): assessed during and after dialysis Adverse events (hypotension): assessed until the end of treatment Laboratory results (cholesterol, triglycerides, BUN, plasma creatinine, sodium, potassium): assessed pre and post dialysis
Notes	Additional information Funding: not reported Conflicts of interest/disclosures: not reported Trial registration identification number: not applicable A priori published protocol: not reported
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: "Each patient was interrogated in a standardized fashion by the same person (Th. N.) during each dialysis concerning the preceding one. [...] The questionnaire was evaluated on a three‐point system, 0, +, + +, headache during and after dialysis, fatigue and leg cramps." 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, objective and subjective outcomes were assessed
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. Fatigue at the end of treatment was not reported in a format that was extractable for meta‐analysis. 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