Pari 1998.

Methods	Study type: individual RCT Randomisation method: "stratified blocked random method" Blinding: double‐blind Intention‐to‐treat analysis used: at least partly
Participants	Inclusion criteria of the trial Seborrhoeic dermatitis of the face and trunk Exclusion criteria of the trial People on chlorpromazine, cimetidine, alpha‐methyldopa, INAH (isonicotinic acid hydrazide), or steroids Infants People with Parkinsonism or AIDS Number of randomised participants: 36 in total (clobetasol N = 19, ketoconazole N = 17) Number of dropouts: 5 (14%) Sex: not reported Age: not reported Country: India
Interventions	Treatment Clobetasol 17‐butyrate 0.05% cream, applied to the affected areas (except scalp) twice daily for 4 weeks Comparator/s Ketoconazole 2% cream, applied to the affected areas (except scalp) twice daily for 4 weeks
Outcomes	Severity score (severity combined with erythema, scaling, and papules) Itching (scale not reported) Remission rate Relapse rate (at the end of 3 months) Side‐effect profile
Notes	Results were not reported separately for face and trunk. Adverse events were not reported
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "A stratified blocked random method was used to allocate the recruited patients into two groups according to severity"
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	This was not reported in detail
Similarity of the study groups (selection bias)	Unclear risk	This was not reported in detail
Blinding of participants (performance bias)	Low risk	Quote: "Neither the doctor nor the patient knew"
Blinding of care providers (performance bias)	Low risk	Quote: "Neither the doctor nor the patient knew"
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	The study did not report whether the outcome was assessed by a third party
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	The dropout rate was acceptable
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	The predefined outcomes included side‐effects, but they were not reported
Other bias	Low risk	No other bias was identified