Conrotto 2006.

Methods	Study design: RCT Conducted in Italy Number of centres: 1 Recruitment period: 1999–2002 Funding source: company provided drugs
Participants	Inclusion criteria: clinical and histological OLP; painful lesions Exclusion criteria: presence of histological signs of dysplasia; use of lichenoid reaction‐inducing drugs; presence of amalgam fillings close to lesions; therapy for OLP in the 6 months prior to the study; skin, genital or other extraoral lesions; pregnant or breastfeeding women Group A: randomised 20; analysed 19 Group B: randomised 20; analysed 20
Interventions	Group A: clobetasol propionate 0.025% in 4% hydroxyethyl cellulose gel, twice daily for 2 months Group B: ciclosporin 1.5% in 4% hydroxyethyl cellulose gel, twice daily for 2 months
Outcomes	Pain resolution, clinical score (Thongprasom), adverse effects, cost
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "computer‐generated random number tables."
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Authors implied that the allocation list was hidden and allocation performed by pharmacy.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Quote: "double blind"; however, ciclosporine has a distinct foul taste so assessed as 'unclear'
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Quote: "double blind."
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Comment: missing data not likely to have a clinically relevant impact on the intervention effect estimate (1 participant from Group A). Unlikely to have introduced bias.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Planned outcomes reported.
Other bias	Low risk	No other sources of bias identified.