Hellerstein 2001.

Methods	Design: RCT Phases: acute (8 weeks), continuation (16 weeks) Comparison groups: fluoxetine vs fluoxetine + group psychotherapy Funded by: grant from Eli Lilly Company.
Participants	Number of participants randomized (NRCT: number of participants included): 40 Criteria for relapse/recurrence: not available Age distribution in sample (mean): 45.1 (SD 9.8) years Sex distribution in sample (% women): 50 Diagnoses in sample: 100% dysthymia Depression severity at continuation/maintenance baseline (mean): HAM‐D 21: fluoxetine: 7.8 (SD 4.7); combination: 6.2 (SD 4.9) Age of onset: unclear Length current/last major episode in months: unclear
Interventions	Continuation treatment (16 weeks) Fluoxetine (participants = 18) Name (class and type): fluoxetine (SSRI) Planned dosage of drug: 20–80 mg/day Dosage of drug (mean): 38.8 (SD 18.9) mg/day Combination (participants = 19) Name (class and type): fluoxetine (SSRI) + group psychotherapy (CT/IPT) Planned number of sessions + dosage of drug: 16 sessions + 20–80 mg/day Dosage of drug (mean): 37.4 (SD 17.3) mg/day Notes: participants were not allowed to currently undergo another psychotherapy. In the medication group, psychiatrists were instructed not to engage in psychotherapy, counselling, or supportive interventions.
Outcomes	HAM‐D‐21 mean (end of intervention and follow‐up) Dropout any SWLS (end of intervention and follow‐up)
Notes	Possibly conflict of interest (funded by Eli Lilly); discrepant information given in text vs tables; sometimes also unclear/discrepant: information given in text itself; treatment/group therapy = CIGP‐CD manual, which is not classified by Cochrane.
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	High risk	Psychotherapy trial, no blinding possible.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	Quote: "Unblinded raters" (p. 101)
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	LOCF method for physician rated scales: 7/35 (20%) dropout at follow‐up (36 weeks), these scales are main outcomes; no comment why participants dropped out.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	No existing study protocol.
Other bias	High risk	Quote: "Insufficient treatment adherence: Sessions were audiotaped and reviewed in weekly supervision meetings for adherence to the manual." (pp. 96–7) Allegiance bias/conflict of interest: financed by pharmaceutical company, but unclear/no further information. Attention bias: more attention in the combination group as this group also received psychotherapy. Other: very likely that randomization was before acute treatment, but it was not described clearly. Discrepant information in the text.