Reblin 2018.

Methods	Randomised controlled trial (pilot)
Participants	Inclusion criteria: identified as the person who provided the most care for an adult diagnosed with primary malignant brain tumour; English speaking and reading; having an email address; aged >18 years Exclusion criteria: none specified. Authors clarified there were no specific exclusion criteria, other than not meeting inclusion criteria. Number randomised: 40; 30 intervention group, 10 control group Follow‐up: baseline, 3 weeks, 6 weeks Setting: National Cancer Institute‐designated comprehensive cancer centre in the US
Interventions	Intervention group: eSNAP, a web‐based application which takes 10–15 minutes to help caregivers list people or groups who could help within 6 categories of support: 1. hands‐on; 2. informational; 3. communication; 4. financial; 5. emotional; and 6. self‐care. A network visualisation was provided to caregivers in PDF/print. Control group: care as usual
Outcomes	Primary outcome (confirmed by authors) Feasibility (recruitment and retention rates) Secondary outcomes: Caregiver burden (Zarit Caregiver Burden Scale) Distress (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) Use of eSNAP (yes/no question of whether participants had reviewed their network visualisation; Satisfaction (single item from 1 (not at all satisfied) to 5 (very satisfied)
Notes	100% neuro‐oncology (40 participants; 30 intervention group, 10 control group
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Method of randomisation not described in the report. Computer random number generator used (confirmed by authors).
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Not described in the report. Computer random number generator used (confirmed by authors).
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Not possible due to nature of intervention.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Not described in the report. Analysis were performed blind (confirmed by authors).
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	20% attrition at 6 weeks. No information provided on reasons for dropout or how missing data were handled in the report. Authors confirmed that within those who completed assessments, < 10% of data were missing and no data imputation was done.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	No published protocol