Sengupta 2011.

Methods	Study design: 3‐arm parallel RCT Power calculation: no Intention‐to‐treat analysis: no, 3 post randomisation drop outs were not analysed
Participants	Inclusion criteria Setting: uncertain, possibly single centre Country: India Females with a history of recurrent UTIs, with dysuria, frequency, blood in urine or pain in suprapubic region and negative pregnancy test Number: 60 randomised and analysed Exclusion criteria Antibiotics in past 48 hours; catheterized within last 2 weeks; diabetes; cardiovascular disease; pyelonephritis; kidney stones
Interventions	Treatment group 1 Cranberry: 500 mg/d Treatment group 2 Cranberry: 1000 mg/d Control group No treatment 1.5% PAC, Decas Botanical Synergies
Outcomes	Symptomatic UTI with > 104 cfu/mL E.coli pure growth
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Computer generated
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Externally managed, sealed envelopes opened in order; completed by independent person
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Participants were not blinded
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Uncertain if researchers or assessors were blind to allocated treatment
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Nothing apparent but unclear in the report Exclusions post randomisation: 3
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Symptomatic culture proven UTI is most appropriate outcome
Other bias	Unclear risk	Unclear how the 225 patients were recruited, may be some selection bias Source of funding: NS