Watkins 2007.

Study characteristics
Methods	Study design: parallel design Number of arms: 2 Experimental arm: motivational interviewing Control arm: usual care
Participants	Geographical location: UK Setting: inpatient Stroke criteria: all subtypes Method of stroke diagnosis: via clinical signs and CT (97%) Time since stroke: 5 to 28 days prior to randomisation Inclusion criteria: 1) over 18 years Exclusion criteria: 1) severe cognitive and communication problems; 2) moving out of the area after discharge; 3) already receiving psychiatric or clinical psychology intervention Total number randomised in this study: 157 Number randomised to treatment group: 77 (69% men, mean age 70 years, SD 10) Number randomised to control group: 80 (70% men, mean age 70 years, SD 10) Total number included in final analysis: 157 Number included in treatment group for final analysis: 77 Number included in control group for final analysis: 80
Interventions	Treatment: motivational interviewing Treatment duration: treatment was up to 4 sessions, 1 per week, with same therapist Administered by: nursing and psychology (non‐clinical) staff, Supervision: by a clinical psychologist Intervention fidelity: 16/204 did not receive any intervention sessions. 188/204 received at least one session. 42/204 received between 1‐3 sessions only Control: usual care Follow‐up: not reported
Outcomes	Primary outcomes Depression measured using the GHQ‐28 Secondary outcomes Depression measured using the Yale Depression Screen Activities of daily living measured using the BI
Notes	Additional unpublished data provided by authors
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Quote: "A research nurse randomized patients (1:1 ratio) to either usual care (control) or MI (intervention) using minimization over sex, age (65 and 65 years), baseline function in activities of daily living (ADL; Barthel: 18 to 20; 11 to 17; 0 to 10),24 and location (acute stroke unit or not)." pp. 1957 Comments: method of sequence generation not reported.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	High risk	Quote: "The same nurse then assigned intervention group patients to 1 of 4 therapists using an opaque sealed envelope in a pseudo‐randomized blocked design." pp. 1957
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Quote: "The therapists were not involved in the initial assessment of patients, randomization, or assignment of patients to therapists." pp. 1957 Comments: the same research nurse randomised and assigned patients to therapists
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	Quote: "Surviving patients were sent a questionnaire. Patients not returning questionnaires within 2 weeks were telephoned by a second research nurse, blind to group allocation, and given the option of declining, having a further questionnaire posted, completing the questionnaire over the telephone, or receiving a home visit to assist." pp. 1958
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Comments: Figure 1 shows the trial profile. Under analysis, it states that all participants were included in the analysis. Missing data were imputed
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	Comments: no trial protocol available to compare with the publication
Other bias	Low risk	Comments: there was no statistically significant difference between the treatment and control group in baseline demographic characteristics