Alecrim 2005.

Methods	This trial is only available as an abstract publication. On request the first author informed us that sequence generation, allocation concealment and blinding were performed as in Alecrim 2008. Triallists performed both intention‐to‐treat analyses and analyses based on available data.
Participants	Number of participants included/analysed: 64/64 (in intention‐to‐treat analysis; information from author) Condition: migraine with or without aura Demographics: not reported Setting: outpatient headache clinic of a neurology department of State University of Campinas, Brazil Time since onset of headaches: not reported
Interventions	Acupuncture points: individualized selection according to traditional Chinese medicine DeChi achieved?: yes (information from author) Number of treatment sessions: 16 Frequency of sessions: 2/week for first 4 weeks, then 1/week for 8 weeks (information from author) Information on acupuncturists: 1 acupuncturist trained in Spain and 12 years of practical experience (information from author) Control intervention: sham acupuncture (superficial needling without manipulation at non‐indicated points)
Outcomes	Method for outcome measurement: diary
Notes	This trial is the third in a series performed by the study authors. The trials Alecrim 2006and Alecrim 2008 were performed before this study. The authors provided data for effect size calculations (50% response rates, migraine days, attacks, rescue medication use).
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Only published abstract available, therefore the study was not assessed formally. According to study authors, methods are the same as in Alecrim 2006 and Alecrim 2008.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Only published abstract available, therefore the study was not assessed formally. According to study authors, methods are the same as in Alecrim 2006 and Alecrim 2008.
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Only published abstract available, therefore the study was not assessed formally. According to study authors, methods are the same as in Alecrim 2006 and Alecrim 2008.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes up to 3 month after randomisation	Unclear risk	Only published abstract available, therefore the study was not assessed formally. According to study authors, methods are the same as in Alecrim 2006 and Alecrim 2008.
Incomplete follow‐up outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes later than 3 months after randomisation	Unclear risk	Only published abstract available, therefore the study was not assessed formally. According to study authors, methods are the same as in Alecrim 2006 and Alecrim 2008.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	Only published abstract available, therefore the study was not assessed formally. According to study authors, methods are the same as in Alecrim 2006 and Alecrim 2008.