Koc 2009.

Methods	Study type: individual RCT Randomisation method: participants were randomised according to a random digit table Blinding: no (open‐label) Intention‐to‐treat analysis used: no
Participants	Inclusion criteria of the trial Seborrhoeic dermatitis Exclusion criteria of the trial Coexistent other dermatoses involving the face or other affected area (e.g. psoriasis, rosacea, and acne vulgaris) Allergy to medications Use of any topical or systematic treatments in the previous month Participants who had severe SeD requiring systemic treatment Number of randomised participants: 48 in total (pimecrolimus N = 23, ketoconazole N = 25) Number of dropouts: 10 (21%) Sex: 34 males, 4 females Mean age (range): pimecrolimus arm = 32.3 (21 to 50), ketoconazole arm = 29.8 (20 to 47) Country: Turkey
Interventions	Treatment Pimecrolimus 1% cream, applied twice daily for 6 weeks Comparator/s Ketoconazole 2% cream, applied twice daily for 6 weeks The total follow‐up time was 12 weeks
Outcomes	Total clinical severity scores (including erythema, scaling, and infiltration with scale 0 to 3) Adverse events
Notes	We received additional data from the first author The affected area or site of SeD lesions as inclusion criteria were not reported. However, coexistent dermatoses involving the face or other affected areas were mentioned as exclusion criteria, suggesting that facial SeD was an inclusion criterion
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "random digits table"
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Quote: "random digits table"
Similarity of the study groups (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "The treatment groups were not statistically significantly different at baseline"
Blinding of participants (performance bias)	High risk	This was an open‐label study
Blinding of care providers (performance bias)	High risk	This was an open‐label study
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	This was an open‐label study
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	The dropout rate over was 20%; reasons were not given in detail. There was discrepancy between text and figure 1 with regard to distribution of dropouts
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Predefined outcomes as stated in the article were reported
Other bias	Low risk	Note: The affected area was not reported