Onnis 2012.

Methods	RCT
Participants	Country: Italy Diagnostic tool: DSM‐IV‐TR No. screened: No detail No. randomised: Total: 28 (16 BN, 12 AN); SFT:14 (AN + BN; MNT:14 (AN + BN) No. started trial: Done No dropped out during intervention: Done No dropped out during follow‐up: Done No. analysed (observed case): Done Mean age in years (SD): SFT: 18; MNT: 19.3 Age range in years: Total: Done Gender %: Female 100% Subtype purging %: No detail Subtype restricting %: No detail Age of onset: Done Duration of illness: SFT: 1.8 years; MNT: 2.1 years Baseline weight: SFT: 39.7; MNT: 36.4 Baseline BMI: SFT: 14.5; MNT: 14.2 Baseline eating disorder scale score: EDI ‐ No detail Baseline purging: No detail Comorbidity: Done Details on living arrangements: Done Family education/employment/income: SFT: 1 upper‐middle, 3 middle, 2 lower‐middle SES; MNT: 1 upper‐middle, 3 middle, 2 lower‐middle Recruitment strategy: Recrutied from non‐hospitalised patients connected to the Service for Eating Disorders of the Department of Neuropsychiatic Sciences for Child Development Exclusion criteria: Unclear
Interventions	Setting of care: Outpatient Training/qualification of care provider(s): No detail Treatment manual: No detail Supervision of treatment: No detail Adherence to treatment: No detail Intervention group 1 Description: Minuchin's structural family therapy Length: 20 ‐ 25 sessions (over 12 months; 1 session every 2 weeks) Intervention group 2 Description: Treatment as usual Comprised Medical Nutritional Therapy and "possibly supported by psychiatric counselling" (pg. 40) Length: No detail
Outcomes	Eating psychopathology EDI EAT ‐ Data not reported Behavioural indices BMI Family Functioning Unclear
Notes	Mixed AN and BN sample. Based on the following quote "subdivided, with a randomisation distribution, into two homogeneous, experimental and control groups, of 14 patients each" (pg 40), we made the assumption that the 4:3 distribution (16 BN:12 AN) at inclusion was replicated in the experimental and control conditions (8 BN:6 AN per condition)
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Quote: "... the patients were randomly assigned to the two experimental and control groups." No further detail.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No detail
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Therapists and participants cannot be blinded in trials of family‐based therapy
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	No detail
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Some separated AN and BN data reported, and some conjoint. SDs not reported
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	Not all measures have been reported (e.g. EAT). Unclear presentation of data. No useable data.