Toledo 2000.

Methods	Design: randomised controlled trial
Participants	Number: 40 Age: intervention group: mean age 53.7, comparator group 1: mean age 55.4, comparator group 2: mean age 58.9 Gender: intervention group: 3 males, comparator group 1: 2 males, comparator group 2: 5 males Setting: not reported Eligibility criteria: BPPV diagnosed with clinical assessment and electronystagmography Exclusion criteria: CNS disturbances Baseline characteristics: described as similar between the groups but not reported
Interventions	Intervention group: VR (PC, head‐eye and habituation) (n = 10) Comparator group 1: Semont manoeuvre (n = 10) Comparator group 2: Semont + VR (n = 20) VR versus other versus VR + other
Outcomes	Primary outcome: Dix‐Hallpike cure rate
Notes	Number of participants at follow‐up assessments was not reported
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	High risk	There was no blinding of assessors or participants
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	It is not clear from the results or the figures whether the data from all participants are included
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	Numbers of participants in each group not provided in figures of results; data not reported adequately to enable meta‐analysis
Other bias	Low risk	The study appears to be free of other sources of bias