McGuire 2012.

Methods	RCT, split‐mouth design, 2 treatment groups, 5 years' duration
Participants	20 individuals, 10 females, aged 23 to 62 years, with 2 Miller Class II maxillary buccal gingival recessions of at least 4 mm. 19 individuals completed the 6‐month follow‐up, 17 completed the 12‐month follow‐up, and 9 the 5‐year follow‐up
Interventions	1. EMP + CAF 2. SCTG + CAF
Outcomes	GRC CALC KTC*(2) PCRC MRC (Manual probe)
Notes	Practice‐based and supported by BIORA AB (currently Straumann) Unpublished data were included following contact with author
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Computer generated randomisation list
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Adequate ‐ sealed envelope
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Information not reported
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	All measurements were performed by 1 examiner not aware of the type of surgical procedure
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	3 patients did not complete the 12‐month follow‐up: 1 participant dropped out because he had moved out of the country (where the RCT was conducted), 1 had a change in job and could not comply with study schedule and 1 was not compliant and was exited from the trial. Moreover, at the 10‐year final evaluation, just 9 out 17 patients available at short‐term assessment were available/agreed to be re‐evaluated (reasons were not reported) Data are equally missing in both intervention groups (split‐mouth design), but reasons for these are both reported and balanced across groups, then important bias is not to be expected
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Evidence of selective reporting of outcomes was not detected
Other bias	Low risk	Evidence of other bias was not detected