Hu 2016.

Study characteristics
Methods	Randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group trial
Participants	Diagnosis: DSM‐IV major depressive disorder N: 30 randomised (27 completed the trial) Age: escitalopram and placebo group M = 41.0 (SD = 11.1); escitalopram andIV ketamine group M = 36.7 (SD = 14.0) Sex: escitalopram and placebo group 71.4% female; escitalopram and IV ketamine group 53.8% female Baseline depression severity: escitalopram and placebo group MADRS score M = 32.3 (SD = 6.5); escitalopram and IV ketamine group MADRS score M = 36.5 (SD = 7.8)
Interventions	Patients meeting entry criteria entered a 2‐week wash‐out phase of previously taken psychtropic medications (fluoxetine = 4 weeks). Patients were then randomised to 4 weeks of fixed‐dose escitalopram10 mg/day plus a single saline solution infusion (placebo) or fixed dose escitalopram 10 mg/day plus a single sub‐anaesthetic dose of i.v. ketamine hydrochloride administered over 40minutes. Escitalopram and placebo group (N = 14) Escitalopram andIV ketamine group (N = 13) Concomitant treatments: yes, other medications not affecting the central nervous system were allowed.
Outcomes	MADRS Response rates (≥50% reduction from the baseline MADRS) Remitter rates (MADRS total score ≤10) QIDS‐SR BPRS YMRS CADSS
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No further information beyond, "patients were randomized according to a table of random numbers".
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No information given on allocation concealment
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	No information given beyond, "The anesthesiologist was blind to the group membership of patients". No direct information regarding blinding of participants.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Quote: "Two raters with >5 years of clinical experience and blind to the study protocol and treatment assignments indepently assessed patients"
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	Study reports dropouts. Dropout last assessment carried forward.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	Protocol unavailable
Other bias	Low risk	Funded by University. No conflict of interests.