Dam 1989

Methods	Randomised, multicentre, double‐blind trial conducted in 20 centres across four European countries 2 treatment arms: CBZ and OXC
Participants	Participants aged 15‐65 years with newly diagnosed and previously untreated epilepsy Number randomised: total of 235 but 41 excluded for protocol violations (number randomised by treatment group not stated). Number analysed: CBZ = 100, OXC = 94 96 male participants (49%) out of those analysed Proportion with partial epilepsy not stated Median age (range): 33 (14‐63)
Interventions	Monotherapy with CBZ or OXC Starting daily dose CBZ: 200 mg OXC: 300 mg. Mean daily dose (range) achieved CBZ: 684 (300 mg‐1400 mg), OXC: 1040 (300 mg‐1800 mg) Titration period of 4‐8 weeks followed by a maintenance period of 48 weeks Mean (range) duration of follow‐up (maintenance period): 336 (10‐390) days
Outcomes	Changes in seizure frequency between baseline and the end of each maintenance period Changes in EEG tracings between baseline and the end of each maintenance period Global evaluation of therapeutic efficacy and tolerability by the investigator at the end of each maintenance period Side effects observed by participants and investigators each visit Laboratory tests (while blood cell counts and liver function tests, blood pressure and pulse, drug trough serum levels)
Notes	Trial authors could not be contacted to request IPD. Outcomes chosen for this review were not reported
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Trial described as randomised, no further information provided
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No information provided
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Trial was of double‐blind design
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	No information provided
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	Attrition rate reported, up to 30% of randomised participants who did not complete the trial were excluded from analyses; this is not an ITT approach
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Efficacy, and tolerability outcomes specified in the methods sections were reported well in the results section. No protocol was available. Outcomes chosen for this review were not reported
Other bias	Low risk	None identified