Clancy 1988.

Methods	Randomized to decision aid vs usual care
Participants	753 + 263 health physicians considering Hep B vaccine in the USA
Interventions	DA: pamphlet on options' outcomes, clinical problem, outcome probability, explicit values clarification (personal decision analysis), guidance/coaching Comparator: usual care (no information provided)
Outcomes	Uptake of option
Notes	—
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Random numbers table; all incoming residents were assigned to Group 2 (non‐randomized residents identified as subgroup) (p 2)
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No information provided
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	No blinding of participants or personnel. Did not report on how this may affect their findings
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Unclear blinding but decisions for screening were retrieved from health records (objective data)
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Flow chart not included. Insufficient information to make a judgment
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	No information provided
Other bias	High risk	Potential selection bias ‐ non‐randomized residents were added to group 2 and therefore potential unbalanced distribution (p 287) Low response rate among those offered decision analysis