Eslamzadeh 2018.

Study characteristics
Methods	8‐week parallel trial of atomoxetine + risperidone versus placebo + risperidone
Participants	Inclusion criteria: meet the DSM‐5 for ASD 6‐17 years of age Exclusion criteria: concomitant ADHD other psychiatric disorders any other medical conditions use of any psychotropic apart from risperidone IQ < 50 Location/setting: outpatient clinic of Ibnesina hospital, Iran Mean IQ: details not provided Mean age: 8.0 years Gender: 6 female, 34 male Sample size: 40‐20 each group Number analysed: 20 in each group completed the trial Reasons for dropouts: 3 from atomoxetine group discontinued due to withdrawing consent (1) and AEs (2) and 1 from placebo group did not start the trial. Baseline ABC‐I or other BoC scale: not reported Timing of outcome assessments: "patients were evaluated at baseline, 4 weeks and 8 weeks after the administration of the drug". Concomitant medications: apart from risperidone, participants could not be taking any other psychotropic drugs. Previous medications ‐ not reported
Interventions	Intervention (atomoxetine + risperidone): atomoxetine was given at 0.5 mg/kg/day at the start and increasing every 5 days up to a maximum of 1.2 mg/kg/day for 8 weeks. All participants were currently taking risperidone ranging from 1‐4 mg/day Comparator (placebo + risperidone): placebo plus usual intake of risperidone for 8 weeks
Outcomes	Primary outcomes: AEs Secondary outcomes: tolerability
Notes	Study start date: August 2015 Study end date: September 2016 Funding: "This work was extracted from a residency thesis in the Mashhad University of Science. There was no organizational financial support". Conflicts of interest: "There are no conflicts of interest". Other: trial registry IRCT2016022826802N1
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Details not provided
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Details not provided
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Quote: "double blind". No further details provided
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	The trial registry stated that investigators were not blinded.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	The numbers that discontinued in the treatment group do not match what was analysed (i.e they report 3 dropouts but 4 not included in the analysis).
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	The outcomes listed on the clinical registry were reported
Other bias	High risk	The contact author is also on the ethics committee at the university funding the study. The contact author is a peer‐reviewer for one of the journals in which some of their studies are published.