Aquilani 2008.

Methods	Randomised clinical trial, Italy
Participants	48 adults hospitalised with subacute stroke, cognitive dysfunction (< 20 in the mini‐mental state examination) and independent in their alimentation. They were at nutritional risk due to stroke. Male:Female = 27:21 Mean age = 73 years (experimental group), 71 years (control group) Exclusion criteria: aphasic patients, patients with chronic renal failure or diabetes on hypoglycaemic therapy, or both
Interventions	Experimental group: Oral caloric‐protein supplement for 21 days, containing 200 ml mixture of cubit an, nutricia, Italy providing 250 calories, 20 g protein, 28,2 g carbohydrates and 7 g lipids (n = 24) Control group: No intervention (n = 24)
Outcomes	Anthropometric and nutritional (3‐day diary) variables, cognitive function (MMSE) Weight, height, BMI, daily caloric and macronutrient intake
Study dates	Not stated
Notes	We contacted the authors on 27th September 2015 by email: labmio@unipv.it. We received an initial reply, but did not receive a reply for our follow‐up questions.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Randomisation where performed using SAS statistical tool
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	The description of allocation concealment was too unclear to permit judgement of low or high risk of bias.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	The study reports to be "double blinded", but does not explicitly describe how. The physician who evaluated the MMSE score was blinded to the supplementation and was different from the physician who prescribed the supplementation.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Not described
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	The number of participants with incomplete data was not reported.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	No protocol could be obtained and the trial did not report all‐cause mortality and serious adverse events.
For‐profit bias	Unclear risk	It was unclear how the trial was funded.
Other bias	Low risk	The trial appeared to be free of other components that could put it at risk of bias.