Baker 1985.

Methods	Randomised trial of individual vs group therapy
Participants	Included (n = 39) Adolescent females 13 to 17 years of age who had suffered contact sexual abuse validated by child protective services. Ethnicity: white 31, black 8. The girls were in the process of court proceedings or investigative procedures; 9 completed the court process during treatment Excluded Not reported Setting Counselling centre in a rural county in Delaware, USA
Interventions	Both therapies Therapists were instructed to use Rogerian techniques in both individual and group therapies. Therapists were given a list of topics to be introduced for discussion, including associated emotions and life changes, assertiveness and coping, family roles, support systems and resources, communication, court preparation and social concerns Individual therapy (n = 15) Individual therapy sessions of 1 hour were conducted for 10 weeks Group therapy (n = 24) Group therapy allowed sharing of experiences and information and provided feedback from other victims. Group sessions of 1 ½ hours were run with a maximum of 8 participants over 6 weeks Therapists All held master's level degrees in counselling disciplines, had received training in treatment of sexual abuse and were skilled in Rogerian techniques. Therapists were also provided with examples of Rogerian techniques (restatement, reflection of meaning, reflection of feeling, congruence, acceptance and reinforcement of positive feelings). Each of the 3 therapists led 1 group and saw 5 girls individually
Outcomes	Depression Scale: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing Depression Scale Rater: adolescent Anxiety Scale: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing Anxiety Scale Rater: adolescent When Post therapy
Notes	Depression and anxiety were in the normal range at pretest for both groups
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Random assignment was achieved by having participants draw 1 slip of paper at a time from a box until all were assigned
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not reported
Blinding of participants (performance bias	Unclear risk	Participants could not be blinded, but both groups received a psychological therapy
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Outcome assessment could not be blinded, as all measures were self report
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Loss to follow‐up was not reported
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All outcomes appear to have been reported
Other bias	Low risk	No other apparent bias