Nassar 2007.

Methods	Randomized to decision aid vs usual care
Participants	102 + 98 women diagnosed with a breech presentation from 34 weeks gestation considering external cephalic version in Australia
Interventions	DA: 24‐page booklet, 30‐minute audio‐CD and worksheet; clinical problem, outcome probability, explicit values clarification, opinions of others', guidance (Ottawa Decision Support Framework) Comparator: usual care counselling and information on the management of breech presentation
Outcomes	Primary outcomes: knowledge, decisional conflict, anxiety, satisfaction with the decision, Secondary outcomes: preferred role in decision making, preferred choice
Notes	—
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	"[R]andomly generated using computer and stratified by parity and center using random variable block sizes" (p 2)
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	"[P]articipants were randomized by telephoning a remote, central location" (p 2)
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Womens were not blinded ‐ unclear if this would introduce bias to outcome assessed
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Unclear blinding but outcomes were objectively measured and not subjective to interpretation
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Loss to follow‐up because of onset of labour or incomplete data forms (p 3). Baseline characteristics are included and equal. Minimum of 84 participants in each study group achieved; p 4 ‐ flow diagram
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	ISRCTN14570598
Other bias	Low risk	"Maternal characteristics and baseline measures of cognitive and affective outcomes were comparable between groups" (p 3 Results, Table 1) "Blinding clinicians and employment of a research midwife to interact with women" (p 6)