Pavlou 2012.

Methods	Design: randomised controlled trial
Participants	Number: 16 Age: intervention group: mean age 42.0, range 25 to 51, comparator group: mean age 42.1, range 28 to 54 Gender: intervention group: 2 males, comparator group: 7 males Setting: university Eligibility criteria: participants with a history of acute onset of vertigo and with a confirmed peripheral vestibular deficit on the basis of the caloric tests and/or rotational tests on ENG Exclusion criteria: those with migrainous vertigo, Ménière's disease, BPPV, central vestibular disorders, other neurological disorders, significant systemic illness or psychiatric disorders Baseline characteristics: symptom duration was significantly longer in the intervention group
Interventions	Intervention group: dynamic virtual reality, performed for 45 minutes twice weekly for 4 weeks plus home exercises and general conditioning programme (walking) (n = 5) Comparator group 1: static virtual reality image rehabilitation, performed for 45 minutes twice weekly for 4 weeks plus home exercises and general conditioning programme (walking) (n = 11) Comparator group 2: cross‐over of 5 group 1 participants who then received dynamic virtual reality (not included in our analysis) (n = 5) VR versus VR versus VR
Outcomes	Primary outcome: Dynamic Gait Index Secondary outcomes: Beck Depression Inventory, Beck Anxiety Inventory, Fear Questionnaire, Situational Vertigo Questionnaire, virtual reality exercise symptom scores
Notes	No participants were lost to follow‐up
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Insufficient information about the sequence generation process
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Insufficient information about the method of allocation
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	It is not clear whether participants were blinded to the purpose of the experiment or whether they were aware that there were 2 types of virtual reality training groups. An independent observer was used to collect the Dynamic Gait Index outcome data
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Only 1 participant did not complete the study in the static virtual reality group and their data were not included in the analysis
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Study protocol not available but all data appear to be reported
Other bias	Low risk	The study appears to be free of other sources of bias