Lin 2009a

Methods	Randomised controlled trial using a stratified block allocation scheme Computerised (block) randomisation, with pre‐stratification according to participating hospital Allocation concealment ensured by use of opaque, numbered envelopes (each hospital site had a pre‐prepared set of envelopes with cards indicating allocation)
Participants	60 participants Inclusion criteria: > 6 months post CVA, > Stage III Brunnstrom stage for proximal and distal parts of upper limb, considerable non‐use of the affected upper limb (Motor activity log, amount of use < 2.5), no serious cognitive deficits (≥ 24 on MMSE), no excessive spasticity in any joints of upper limb (Modified Ashworth Scale ≤ 2), lack of participation in any experimental rehabilitation or drug study within past 6 months, no balance problems sufficient to compromise safety when wearing constraint mitt
Interventions	Group 1 (20 participants): usual care ‐ training for hand function, co‐ordination, balance and movements of the affected upper limb and compensatory practice with affected or both upper limbs Group 2 (20 participants): other upper limb intervention ‐ constraint‐induced therapy: restriction of movement of the unaffected hand by placement in a mitt for 6 hours/day and intensive training of the affected upper limb in functional tasks; level of ability adapted based on patient ability and improvement during training Group 3 (20 participants): bilateral training ‐ simultaneous movements of both affected and unaffected upper limb in functional tasks in symmetric or alternating patterns All groups completed therapy for 2 hours/day, 5 days per week for 3 weeks All other interdisciplinary rehabilitation continued Occupational therapists undertook the training in each group
Outcomes	Primary outcome: performance in activities of daily living: Functional Independence Measure Primary outcome: functional movement ‐ Motor Activity Log: amount of use and quality of movement scales (amount of use scale selected); Stroke Impact Scale ‐ hand function section Secondary outcome: performance in extended activities of daily living: Stroke Impact Scale (ADL/IADL section); motor impairment ‐ motor impairment scales: Fugl‐Meyer scale
Notes	Overall and sub‐scores for the Fugl‐Meyer and Functional Independence measure were presented We only entered the overall scores into the data analysis
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Allocation concealment?	Low risk	Opaque, numbered envelopes
Blinding of outcome assessor?	Low risk	Occupational therapists blinded to group assignment completed outcome assessments
Intention to treat analysis?	Unclear risk	Not reported; no drop‐outs from study
Baseline similarity	Low risk	No significant differences between groups in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics