Bond 1991a.

Methods	Allocation: randomised. Design: single‐centre (two sites, see Bond‐Evansville). Duration: 18 months. Setting: community centre. Location: Anderson, SC, USA.
Participants	Diagnosis: 57% DSM‐III‐R schizophrenia with co‐occurring substance disorder. N = 42.* Age: 18 ‐ 45 years, mean ˜ 30 years. Sex: 14 M, 7 F (only 21 received treatment). Ethnicity: 14% black. Inclusion criteria: chronic, DSM‐III‐R or documented evidence of substance abuse / dependence, extensive hospital/crisis service use over previous year.
Interventions	1. Psychosocial intervention: non‐integrated ACT. Includes reference groups to encourage attendance at CMHC'S, peer support group meetings several times/week, not focused exclusively on substance abuse, used successful members as role models, also home and community visits throughout project period. N = 21. 2. Standard care: routine care. N = 21.**
Outcomes	Leaving the study early: lost to treatment. No other usable data (57% lost to follow‐up).
Notes	ITT analysis. * Control group same as Bond‐Evansville 91. Only 21 received treatment (all figures given are for those 21 who received treatment). ** 4 received assistance from a case management program. Authors have kindly provided further data.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Randomised, no further details.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No details.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Clinician‐/participant‐mediated and participants and personnel not blinded. It is not possible to blind a psychosocial intervention.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Unclear if raters were blind.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	Lost to follow‐up: 57% (24/42 18 months and 50% (21/42) did not receive treatment as planned and no reasons given for missing or lost to follow‐up.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	No protocol to compare outcomes reported. In the published auricles, means and SD were not reported, but were kindly provided by the author.
Other bias	Low risk	No evidence other biases are occurring.