Lugtenberg 2020.

Study characteristics
Methods	Randomised trial, the Netherlands.
Participants	113 patients with Stage I‐IIIB breast cancer treated with chemotherapy.
Interventions	Scores from a PROM assessing quality of life, distress, and care needs fed back to clinicians before chemotherapy cycles vs. usual care.    Intervention features Multiple complex feedback (multiple PROMs at multiple times)  PROM(s) used as intervention: The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer BR‐23 breast cancer questionnaire, The Care Notebook (CNB), The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Distress Thermometer (DT), One free text dialog box (patients were invited to list topics or specific questions they would like to discuss with their HCP during their next hospital visit), One question assessing additional supportive care needs.  Constructs measured: Health related Quality of Life, Symptoms, Functioning, other (additional supportive care needs) Instrument categories/domains: Domain/Disease specific (cancer)    Administration features Where PROMs administered: Non‐clinical setting How administered: Self‐administered Format of PROMs questionnaire(s): Unclear   Feedback features Format of PROMs feedback: Electronic How often information fed back: 3 episodes of recording. Fed back on second and third visit Who information fed back to: Clinicians Information fed back: Scores, Interpretation guidance
Outcomes	Primary outcome: number of quality of life topics discussed prior to chemotherapy initiation.
Notes	Funded by Dutch Pink Ribbon Foundation and Pfizer, Japan. The study period was not reported. The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Randomisation tool not described.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not reported.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Unblinded by nature of intervention.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Not reported.
Baseline outcome measurements similar	Low risk	Baseline measurement the same.
Baseline characteristics similar	Low risk	Baseline characteristics similar.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	Missing data not dealt with.
Was study protected against contamination	High risk	Randomisation at the patient level.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	No protocol.