Ko 2008.

Methods	Method: randomised cross‐over trial Number of dropouts: not described Number of adverse effects: none Deaths: none ITT: yes, all participants completed the study
Participants	Country: Republic of Korea Sample size: 15 people with stroke and neglect Baseline characteristics: 10 men and 5 women; mean age (SD): 62 (9) years; time since stroke (range) 29‐99 days; right‐hemispheric stroke; right‐handed Inclusion criteria: not explicitly described; written informed consent Exclusion criteria: metal in the head or skin lesions in the electrode area; uncontrolled medical problems; severe cognitive impairments
Interventions	Each participant underwent one of the following conditions A‐tDCS over the right posterior parietal cortex (PPC) (2 mA for 20 minutes) followed by sham tDCS (2 mA for 10 seconds), divided by 48 hours of wash‐out period Sham tDCS (2 mA for 10 seconds) followed by A‐tDCS over the right posterior parietal cortex (PPC) (2 mA for 20 minutes), divided by 48 hours of wash‐out period
Outcomes	Outcomes were measured at baseline and at the end of intervention period Line bisection test Letter‐structured cancellation test Shape‐unstructured cancellation test
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Quote: "All of patients participated in both anodal and sham DC brain polarization with counterbalanced and randomized order and 48 hour interval between two sessions"
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not described by the authors
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) Subjective outcome measures	Low risk	There were no subjective outcome measures
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) Objective outcome measures	Unclear risk	Participants were blinded, whereas blinding of personnel was not stated; however the review authors judge that the outcome measurement is not likely to be influenced by lack of blinding
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) Subjective outcome measures	Low risk	There were no subjective outcome measures
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) Objective outcome measures	Unclear risk	Not described by the authors
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Subjective outcome measures	Low risk	There were no subjective outcome measures
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Objective outcome measures	Low risk	All participants apparently completed the study. No treatment withdrawals, no losses to follow‐up, no trial group changes and no major adverse events were stated
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	All outcomes reported in the methods section reported