Sequence generation ‐ was the method used to generate the allocation sequence appropriate to produce comparable groups?

Allocation sequence concealment ‐ was the method used to conceal the allocation sequence appropriate to prevent the allocation being known in advance of, or during, enrolment?

Blinding of participants, personnel and outcome assessors ‐ were measures used to blind study participants, personnel, and outcome assessors from knowledge of which intervention a participant received?

Incomplete outcome data ‐ how complete were the outcome data for the primary outcomes? Were drop‐out rates and reasons for withdrawal reported? Were missing data imputed appropriately? We considered an overall completion rate of 80% or higher as a low risk of bias. If completion rates were only provided by group, a less than 80% completion rate in the treatment group was considered a high risk of bias.

Selective outcome reporting ‐ were appropriate outcomes reported and were any key outcomes missing?

Other potential threats to validity (considering external validity, e.g. relevant use of co‐interventions) ‐ what was the funding source of each of the studies?