Somri 2012.

Methods	Parallel design Funding: not stated Location: Israel
Participants	Inclusion criteria: patients unable to tolerate dental treatment under behavioural management and local anaesthetic or in combination with nitrous oxide use n = 90 Age range = 3 to 10 years Mean age (SD) in years, weight (SD) in kg: Group 1: 5.6 + 1.85, 19.2 + 3.68 Group 2: 5.6 + 1.67, 19.7 + 3.38 Group 3: 6.2 + 2.00, 20.3 + 3.65
Interventions	Group 1: midazolam (0.5 mg/kg) Group 2: midazolam (0.75 mg/kg) Group 3: midazolam (1 mg/kg) All orally
Outcomes	Wisconsin sedation scale, Houpt behavioural rating scale, parent satisfaction
Notes	Immobilisation with manual restraining used Wisconsin level 5 (deep sedation) considered adequate All children received 2 litres of oxygen during treatment
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "randomly assigned by sealed envelope technique"
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not described
Blinding ‐ Participant	Unclear risk	Not described
Blinding ‐ Operator/sedationist	Low risk	Nursing staff administering the midazolam, specialist paediatric dentist and anaesthetist performing procedure and post‐operative discharge nurses were blinded
Blinding ‐ Outcome assessor	Unclear risk	Not described if the assessor was blinded
Incomplete outcome assessment	Low risk	All participants included in the outcome evaluation
Free of selective reporting	Low risk	All planned outcomes reported
Free of other bias	Low risk	No other bias