SELECTIVE OUTCOME REPORTING Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting? [Short form: Free of selective reporting?]
Criteria for a judgment of 'YES' (i.e. low risk of bias)	Any of the following: The study protocol is available and all of the study's prespecified (primary and secondary) outcomes that are of interest in the review have been reported in the prespecified way The study protocol is not available but it is clear that the published reports include all expected outcomes, including those that were prespecified (convincing text of this nature may be uncommon)
Criteria for the judgment of 'NO' (i.e. high risk of bias)	Any one of the following: Not all of the study's prespecified primary outcomes have been reported One or more primary outcomes is reported using measurements, analysis methods or subsets of the data (e.g. subscales) that were not prespecified One or more reported primary outcomes were not prespecified (unless clear justification for their reporting is provided, such as an unexpected adverse effect) One or more outcomes of interest in the review are reported incompletely so that they cannot be entered in a meta‐analysis The study report fails to include results for a key outcome that would be expected to have been reported for such a study
Criteria for the judgment of 'UNCLEAR' (uncertain risk of bias)	Insufficient information to permit judgment of 'Yes' or 'No'. It is likely that the majority of studies will fall into this category