Table 4.

Risk of bias in the included studies on psychosocial and complementary intervention.

	Bias Arising from/Due to:	Rnd	Int	Mis	Mea	Sel	Overall
	Psychosocial Interventions
1	Barkley, 2001 [67]
2	Boyer, 2015 [68]
3	Evans, 2007 [62]
4	Evans, 2016 [63]
5	Langberg, 2012 [64]
6	Meyer, 2021 [69]
7	Schramm, 2016 [65]
8	Sibley, 2016 [70]
9	Sibley, 2019 [71]
10	Sibley, 2020 [72]
11	Sprich, 2016 [73]
12	Steeger, 2016 [66] *
13	Vidal, 2015 [74]
	Complementary Interventions
14	Ahmed, 2011 [75]
15	Bink, 2016 [76]
16	Gray, 2012 [77]
17	Matsudaira, 2015 [78]

Note: : green = low risk of bias, orange = some concerns and red = high risk of bias. Rnd—randomization process; Int—intended interventions; Mis—missing outcome data; Mea—measurement of the outcome; Sel—selection of the reported result. * Since Steeger, 2016, examined both a psychosocial and a complementary intervention, this trial was included in the review of both psychosocial and complementary interventions.