eTable 2. Assessment of the methodological quality of the meta-analyses of controlled trials of medical hypnosis by means of AMSTAR (8).

Reference	Was an ’a priori’ design provided?*	Was there duplicate study selection and data extraction?	Was a comprehensive literature search performed?	Was the status of publication _(i.e. grey literature) used as an inclusion criterion?	Was a list of studies (included and excluded) provided?	Were the characteristics of the included studies provided?	Was the scientific quality of the included studies assessed and documented?	Was the scientific quality of the included studies used appropriately in formulating conclusions?	Were the methods used to combine the findings of studies appropriate?	Was the likelihood of publication bias assessed?	Was the conflict of interest included?	Total
Kekecs et al. 2014 (10)	No	No	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	6
Madden et al. 2012 (11)	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	10
Schäfert et al. 2014 (12)	No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	8
Schnur et al. 2008 (13)	No	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	4
Tefikow et al. 2013 (14)	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	8

^*a priori design: protocol. internal review board approval. or research question previously published?

AMSTAR. A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews