Table 3. Relevance and quality of systematic reviews.

	Primary study designs identified to answer relevant review question	Total number of RCTs extracted	Number of extracted RCTs judged to include SM support	R-AMSTAR total score /44
Therapy rehabilitation
Aziz, 2008 [17]	RCTs	5	5	40
Hoffman, 2010 [18]	RCTs	1	0	35
Legg, 2006 [19]	RCTs	9	8	42
OST, 2003 [20]	RCTs	14	11	41
Poulin, 2012 [21]	Controlled and uncontrolled designs	3	1	32
Steultjens, 2003 [22]	Controlled and uncontrolled designs	18	6	32
Walker, 2004 [23]	RCTs	8	8	35
Other SM Support
Ellis, 2010 [24]	RCTs	16	16	35
Ko, 2010 [25]	None identified	0	0	31
Korpershoek, 2011[26]	RCTs	4	2	24
Lui, 2005 [27]	Quantitative and qualitative designs	6	6	24
Rae-Grant, 2011[28]	None identified	0	0	27
Smith, 2008 [29]	RCTs	17	9	40

Relevance of the interventions reported in the RCTs included in the systematic reviews was assessed on the basis of the detail provided in the review report. The quality of reporting details about the interventions varied between the reviews so that some judgement was required.