Manns 2012a2

Methods	For characteristics see Manns 2012a1
Participants
Interventions
Outcomes
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Central randomisation procedure by an interactive voice‐response system
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not described
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Low risk	The study was described as double‐blinded to investigator and participant
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	The study was described as double‐blinded but it was unclear how the blinding was maintained and who performed the outcome assessment.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	15 participants dropped out
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	A protocol was found (NCT00704184), primary objectives were reported correctly, secondary outcomes changed and new exploratory outcomes were reported in the paper
Vested‐interest bias	High risk	This study was funded by Merck Scharp and Dohme Corp.
Other bias	Low risk	The trial appeared to be free of other components that could put it at risk of bias