Vodermaier 2009.

Methods	Randomized to decision aid vs usual care
Participants	74 + 78 women with breast cancer considering treatment options in Germany
Interventions	DA: Decision board administered by research psychologists and booklet on options' outcomes, clinical problem, outcome probability Comparator: booklet on clinical problem
Outcomes	Primary outcome: decisional conflict Secondary outcomes: choice, length of consultation, satisfaction with decision making, participation in decision making
Notes	—
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	"Randomisation after the patient gave written informed consent" "Random assignment was performed by means of numbered cards in envelopes" "stratified by age group" (p 2)
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	"[N]umbered cards in envelopes" (p 2)
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Not blinded ‐ unclear if this would introduce bias to outcome assessed
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Not blinded but outcomes were objectively measured and not subjective to interpretation
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Flow diagram, p 5; baseline characteristics not included
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	No information provided
Other bias	Low risk	Appears to be free of other potential biases