Harrison 1986.

Methods	Design: RCT Phases: continuation treatment (26.1 weeks) after response to phenelzine treatment Comparison groups: phenelzine vs placebo Funded by: probably internal funding by the authors' institution, no information given
Participants	Number of participants randomized (NRCT: number of participants included): 12 Criteria for relapse/recurrence: "Patients were considered to have relapsed and were withdrawn from the protocol if they scored 3 or more on the CGI for 2 consecutive weeks. Patients received a score of 3 on the CGI only if they had a clear recurrence of depressive symptoms." (p. 347) Age distribution in sample: unclear Sex distribution in sample (% women): 83.3 Diagnoses in sample: phenelzine: 20.0% dysthymia, 80.0% double depression; placebo: 58.0% dysthymia, 42.0% double depression Depression severity at continuation/maintenance baseline (mean): HAM‐D phenelzine: 1.8 (SD 1.3); placebo: 4.4 (SD 3.9) Age of onset: unclear Length current/last major episode in months: unclear
Interventions	Continuation treatment (26.1 weeks) Phenelzine (participants = 5) Name (class and type): phenelzine (MAOI) Planned dosage of drug: unclear Dosage of drug (mean): 51.0 (SD 7.4) mg/day Placebo (participants = 7) Name (class and type): tablet placebo Planned dosage of placebo: NR Dosage of placebo: NR Notes: the placebo group discontinued phenelzine treatment over 14 days by tapering the daily dose by 15 mg every 2–3 days according to a predetermined schedule. No information about concomitant treatments.
Outcomes	Relapse/recurrence HAM‐D mean Dropout any Dropout due to adverse event Experiencing any adverse event (no data available for the placebo group) Serious adverse events (no data available for the placebo group)
Notes	After relapse, participants were treated openly as clinically indicated.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No information
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No information
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Quote: "The double blind condition was maintained by providing individual daily medication packets in which the number of tablets was kept constant by substituting matching placebo." (pp. 346–7)
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	No information
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	No missing data
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	No study protocol
Other bias	Unclear risk	Insufficient treatment adherence: no information on treatment adherence. Allegiance bias/conflict of interest: no information about funding/possible conflict of interest. Attention bias: no indication for attention bias, all participants in the placebo group also saw the physician.