Table 2.

Generic quality and risk of bias (domain 2). Sub-domains with a range of items were assessed. Scores between 0 and 2 were used

Sub-domain	Item	Median (25th/75th percentiles, min-max)
Reliability	Are the aims clear?	2 (2/2; 0–2)
Reliability	Is it clear who pays for it?	1 (1/1; 0–2)
Reliability	Is there a declaration of the objectives of the people who run the site?	2 (2/2; 0–2)
Reliability	Is it clear who runs the site?	0 (0/2; 0–2)
Reliability	Is it current?	2 (2/2; 0–2)
Reliability	Is it clear what information sources were used?	0 (0/1; 0–2)
Reliability	Is it clear when the information sources were produced?	0 (0/0; 0–2)
Reliability	Is it balanced and unbiased?	2 (2/2; 0–2)
Reliability	Does it provide details of additional sources?	0 (0/1; 0–2)
Reliability	Does it refer to areas of uncertainty?	0 (0/1; 0–2)
Quality	Does it describe how each treatment works?	1 (0/1; 0–2)
Quality	Does it describe the benefit of each treatment?	1 (0/1; 0–2)
Quality	Does it describe the risk of each treatment?	0 (0/0; 0–2)
Quality	Does it describe what would happen if no treatment is used?	0 (0/0; 0–2)
Quality	Does it describe how the choice of treatment affect quality of life?	0 (0/1; 0–2)
Quality	Is it clear that there may be more than one possible treatment?	1 (0/1; 0–2)
Quality	Does it provide support for shared decision making?	1 (1/2; 0–2)