Plutzer 2012

Methods	Study design: randomised controlled trial Conducted in: Adelaide, Australia Unit of randomisation: mother‐baby pair Unit of analysis: individual Setting: public maternity hospitals Funded by: "The study was supported by the NHMRC Centre of Clinical Research Excellence, Adelaide, South Australia" Duration of the study: 7 years
Participants	Inclusion criteria: not reported Exclusion criteria: pregnant women at high risk and with multiple pregnancies, incomplete questionnaires and inability to comprehend written English Age at baseline: 18 months N (controls baseline): 322 N (controls follow‐up): 136 N (interventions baseline): 327 N (interventions follow‐up): 141 Recruitment: Nulliparous women were recruited into the study in their 5th to 7th month of pregnancy during regular antenatal visits at participating health facilities Gender: not reported
Interventions	Intervention Oral health education through 3 rounds of printed information. This included oral health education on oral health changes during pregnancy, use of pacifiers, oral hygiene during tooth eruption and feeding practices Control: no intervention Duration of intervention: 1 year
Outcomes	Dental caries (dmft, dmfs)
Implementation related factors	Theoretical basis: not reported Resources for implementation: not reported Who delivered the intervention: unclear PROGRESS categories assessed at baseline: education, SES PROGRESS categories analysed at outcome: education, SES Outcomes related to harms/unintended effects: not reported Intervention included strategies to address diversity or disadvantage: not reported Economic evaluation: not reported
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Random number tables were used to generate allocation sequence
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Unclear
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Retention rates were similar in both intervention and control groups and were influenced by the same determinants. Attrition bias occurred to the same extent and for the same reasons in both arms of the trial
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Published report presents all expected outcomes of interest to the review
Other bias	High risk	Study authors acknowledge that contamination occurred during examination at 20 months
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Examiners were unaware of the group to which the child belonged
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Unclear