Meltzer 2018.

Methods	RCT
Participants	Recruited from the community in Canada Inclusion criteria: a history of unilateral stroke resulting in a communication disorder, occurring at least 6 months in the past; availability of a communication partner to participate in the treatment programme; ability to travel to the treatment site if not at home, and ability to hear instructions and operate an iPad tablet to perform homework exercises Exclusion criteria: dementia or other neurological disorder Age, years: intervention group 66.8 (11.2), control group 62.9 (11.6) Gender: 59% men intervention group, 69% men control group Time post‐stroke: not reported (at least 6 months post‐stroke)
Interventions	The study took place over 12 weeks for each participant, with an assessment in the first and last weeks and therapy during the intervening 10 weeks. Telerehabilitation intervention (Aphasia telerehab): remote therapy sessions were conducted via teleconferencing equipment and software. Participants possessing adequate equipment at home consulted the therapist using WebEx, a commercial teleconferencing program. Some clients visited the clinic to receive the telerehabilitation (provided in a separate room and contact with the therapist prohibited). During weeks 2‐11, the therapist conducted a 1‐hour weekly treatment session and TalkPath software was used for homework exercises. Control intervention (Aphasia in‐person): same therapy provided in‐person
Outcomes	Timing of outcome assessment: baseline and post‐intervention (12 weeks) Measures: Western Aphasia Battery Revised Part 1, Cognitive Linguistic Quick Test, Communication Confidence Rating Scale for Aphasia, Communication Effectiveness Index
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not reported
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not reported
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Assessments were conducted by a therapist not involved in the study but not clear if they were blind to allocation.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Reporting of recruitment and withdrawals had limited detail including balance between groups.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	Could not identify study protocol or trial registration
Other bias	Unclear risk	Groups were separated by diagnosis; however it was not clear whether this was factored into the randomisation process.