| Methods |
Randomised controlled trial |
| Participants |
104 female child sexual abuse survivors in the USA |
| Interventions |
STAIR/exposure vs support/exposure vs STAIR/support |
| Outcomes |
CAPS, PSS‐SR, negative mood regulation scale, BDI, STAI, Inventory of Interpersonal Problems, Interpersonal Support Evaluation List |
| Notes |
Treatment was delivered by doctoral level psychologists, who had been trained by leading experts in the field. Adherence was measured. |
| Risk of bias |
| Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) |
Unclear risk |
Comment: The method of sequence generation was not reported. |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) |
Low risk |
Quote "Randomization blocks of nine (three instances of each of the three conditions) were employed, generated by an individual not otherwise involved with the study. Within each randomly assigned condition, the participant was assigned to one of three therapists, based on a match in availability." |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes |
Low risk |
Quote: "Analyses for all symptom outcome measures were performed on the intent‐to‐treat sample using data from all participants according to their randomizations assignment. Missing data were imputed using PROC MI in SAS (SAS Institute, Cary, N.C.) to generate 10 imputed data sets." |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) |
Low risk |
Comment: All specified outcomes were reported. |
| Other bias |
Low risk |
Comment: There were no other obvious sources of bias. |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes |
High risk |
Comment: Participants were aware of their allocation. |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes |
Low risk |
Comment: Assessors were blinded. |
