Trairatvorakul 2008.

Methods	RCT, parallel‐arm Teeth randomly assigned. Conducted in Thailand Setting not mentioned. Operator was 1 investigator (paediatric dentist)
Participants	42 children, 54 teeth, mean age 5.6 years, standard deviation age 1.2 years, age range 3.3 to 7.8 years
Interventions	Group 1:Pulpectomy (ZOE); n = 27 (1 visit) Rubber dam Caries removal prior to pulpal access Pulp access not mentioned No pulpotomy amputation No haemostasis Irrigation with 2.5% sodium hypochlorite Instrumentation with barbed broaches ZOE after pulpectomy before being restored with stainless‐steel crown Group 2:Pulpectomy (calcium hydroxide + iodoform); n = 27 (1 visit) Rubber dam Caries removal prior to pulpal access Pulp access not mentioned No pulpotomy amputation No haemostasis Irrigation with 2.5% sodium hypochlorite Vitapex (CH/iodoform) paste after pulpectomy before being restored with stainless‐steel crown
Outcomes	Clinical success (no pain, healthy soft tissue (defined as the absence of swelling, redness or sinus tract) and no abnormal mobility), radiographic success (radiographic continuity of the lamina dura, reduction in the size of any pathological inter‐radicular or periapical radiolucencies (or both) or evidence of bone regeneration), signs of success (absence of change or more discontinuity of lamina dura and absence of change in size of radiolucency area), pain symptoms, swelling, fistula, pathological mobility: evaluation at 6 and 12 months (at tooth level)
Notes	Source of funding: "The authors wish to thank the Chulalongkorn University Postgraduate Research Fund for financial support"
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Block randomisation
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to make a clear judgement
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to make a clear judgement
Blinding of clinical outcomes assessment	Low risk	Quote: "the clinical diagnoses were blindly assessed by another investigator"
Blinding of radiological outcomes assessment	Low risk	Quote: "the radiographic diagnoses were blindly assessed by another investigator"
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	No missing data
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to make a clear judgement