Hersle 1996.

Methods	Study type: individual RCT Randomisation method: not reported Blinding: double‐blind Intention‐to‐treat analysis used: no
Participants	Inclusion criteria of the trial Seborrhoeic dermatitis of the scalp Exclusion criteria of the trial Known hypersensitivity to any of the components of the test medication Need for other medication that might affect the disease (e.g. systemic corticosteroids or systemic antimycotics) Use of topical remedies for SeD during the 7 days before enrolment or any investigated drug within 1 month before enrolment Number of randomised participants: 54 in total (the initial assignment numbers were not reported by treatment group; at 4 weeks, 27 participants were treated with mometasone, and 22 participants were treated with ketoconazole) Number of dropouts: 5 (9%) Sex: 40 males, 14 females Mean age (range): 58 (22 to 85) years Country: Sweden
Interventions	Treatment Mometasone furoate 0.1% solution, applied to the scalp once daily for 4 weeks Comparator/s Ketoconazole 2% shampoo, applied twice a week for 4 weeks
Outcomes	Erythema, scaling, and pruritus (scale 0 to 3) Total clearance
Notes	Participants and investigators evaluated reduction of pruritus, scaling, and erythema scores, but numerical information of these was not reported. We approximated the numbers from figures. The actual number of participants randomised to each group was unknown
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Randomised, but not reported in sufficient detail
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No information was provided
Similarity of the study groups (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No information was provided
Blinding of participants (performance bias)	Unclear risk	Whilst the study was reported to be double‐blind, it was not clear who was blinded
Blinding of care providers (performance bias)	Unclear risk	Whilst the study was reported to be double‐blind, it was not clear who was blinded
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Whilst the study was reported to be double‐blind, it was not clear who was blinded
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	The actual number of participants randomised to each group was unknown. The dropout rate was 10%, but the study did not report if this was balanced between groups
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	The primary outcomes were not prespecified in detail, yet the outcomes reported were those that are usually used in such studies
Other bias	Unclear risk	The pharmaceutical industry supported the study