Tilak 2016.

Study characteristics
Methods	RCT, parallel.
Participants	26 participants with phantom limb pain to 2 groups. TENS group: 11 men, 2 women, 1 dropout therefore n = 12; mirror group: 12 men, 1 female, n = 13. Age (mean ± SD): TENS group: 36.38 ± 9.55 years; mirror group: 42.62 ± 10.69 years. Amputations: TENS group: 3 upper and 10 lower limb amputations; mirror group: 4 upper and 9 lower limb amputations. Onset of phantom limb pain from date of surgery: TENS group: 13 ± 1.6 days; mirror group: 13 ± 1.4 days. Formal neuropathic pain assessment: no. Sites of pain: upper and lower limb. Concomitant treatment: no detail supplied.
Interventions	TENS group: no TENS frequency details supplied. Intensity: "strong but comfortable" without visible muscle contraction. Location: electrodes placed at site of pain on contralateral limb. Frequency of treatment: 1 session per day for 4 days. Duration: 20 minutes per session. Clinic administered. Mirror group: intact limb movements performed with mirror. Frequency: 1 session per day for 4 days. Duration: 20 minutes per session. Clinic administered.
Outcomes	Pain intensity: no details supplied as to parameters of pain rating (current pain, mean pain, etc.). 0‐10 cm VAS. Outcomes measured at baseline and 4 days later. Study did not report adverse events.
Notes	Funding from higher education institution acknowledged.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Computer generated sequence.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Opaque sealed envelopes.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Both interventions active treatments.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Both interventions active treatments.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	1 participant dropout adequately described.
Incomplete outcome data (participant exclusion from analysis)	Low risk	Dropout minimal. All participants analysed.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All outcomes reported.
Other bias	Low risk	Adequate description and testing of baseline characteristics.
Size of study	High risk	TENS group: n = 12; mirror group: n = 13.