Berger 2018.

Study characteristics
Methods	Study design: RCT Study grouping: parallel group Study duration: 32 weeks
Participants	Inclusion criteria: all schools in the Meru district interested in participating in the programme Exclusion criteria: not reported Age range: mean 12.46 (SD 0.91) years Gender: 50% male, 50% female Intervention sample: 95 Control sample: 88 Main type of traumatic event: compounded stressors Phase of humanitarian crisis: during the acute crisis (mortality is still higher than it was before the crisis) Type of humanitarian crisis: extreme poverty
Interventions	Intervention name: ERSAE‐Stress‐Prosocial (ESPS) Delivered by: para‐professionals (community workers): homeroom teachers, with teaching experience of 4–12 years Format of therapy: face to face Number of sessions (total): 16 (2 weekly 45 minutes) Type of control: school as usual. The control group received 2‐hour social studies classes weekly based on the Ministry of Education curriculum for primary schools. Type of intervention context: schools Type of promotion intervention: group level Description of the intervention: universal school‐based programme (with cultural adaptation), divided into 2 sets of strategies – stress‐reduction interventions and prosocial interventions (i.e. perspective‐taking, empathy training, mindfulness, and compassion‐cultivating practices). Each session contained a warm‐up exercise, experimental work, psycho‐educational knowledge, a contemplative practice, a learned skill, and homework assignments. The homework assignments for the students involved sharing some of the knowledge and the learned skills with their caretakers (i.e. parents, extended family, or guidance counsellors in orphanages) and practicing the skills between the classes.
Outcomes	Functioning Outcome type: continuous outcome Reporting: fully reported Scale: Child Diagnostic Interview Schedule – FI Subscale Direction: lower is better Data value: endpoint, 8‐month follow‐up Prosocial behaviour Outcome type: continuous outcome Reporting: fully reported Scale: SDQ‐Prosocial Direction: higher is better Data value: endpoint, 8‐month follow‐up Acceptability (dropout from trial) Outcome type: dichotomous outcome Reporting: fully reported Data value: endpoint
Notes	Sponsorship source: the authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, or publication of this article. Country: Tanzania Setting: 6 classes of a public primary school in the Meru district of Tanzania Comments: Tanzania: low‐income country in 2013–2015 Author's name: Joy Benatov Institution: University of Haifa Email: jbentov2@gmail.com Address: Abba Khoushy Ave 199, Haifa, 3498838, Israel
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "183 participated in the study: 95 were randomly assigned to receive the ESPS intervention (the experimental group) and 88 took part in social studies classes (SS control group)." No further information reported on the method of random sequence generation, but the balance of participant level characteristics suggests that the randomisation procedures were successful.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No information provided.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Open‐label trial. Participants and personnel were aware of the treatment allocation.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Quote: "Trained local psychology students who were blind to the participants' experimental condition administered the questionnaires and assisted students who had comprehension problems. The teachers who implemented the intervention were not present during the administration and the questionnaires were coded to protect the students' confidentiality."
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	9 (4.3%) whose parents or guardians did not sign informed consent and 14 (6.8%) who did not fill out the questionnaires.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	All measures described in the methods section of the article were also reported in the results. No trial protocol/registration number available.
Therapist qualification	Low risk	Quote: "All the homeroom teachers had a secondary education certificate (known in Tanzania as "Grade A" teachers) with a teaching experience ranging between 4–12 years. The homeroom teachers were trained in a 4‐day workshop (24 hours) by the first author in collaboration with two Tanzanian mental‐health professionals who actively participated in providing information and facilitating the experiential exercises."
Therapist/investigator allegiance	Unclear risk	No information provided.
Intervention fidelity	Low risk	Quote: "During the implementation in the classes, the two Tanzanian mental health professionals observed and then supervised the teachers on a bi‐monthly basis. They also consulted with the first author via scheduled Skype sessions."
Other bias	Low risk	No other sources of bias detected. The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, or publication of the article.