Mericq 2013.

Methods	Study design: parallel RCT Time frame: 2008 to 2009 Follow‐up period: 1 year Primary endpoint: stimulation of growth after 12 months
Participants	Country: Chile Setting: multicentre RCT (2 centres) First cadaveric or living kidney transplant; < 16 years with a bone age ≤ 15 years in boys and ≤ 13 years in girls Number (randomised/analysed): withdrawal group (14/12); maintenance group (16/12) Mean age ± SD (years) (only reported for prepubertal patients); withdrawal group (6 ± 3); maintenance group (6 ± 4) Sex (female) (only for prepubertal patients reported): withdrawal group (50%); maintenance group (42%) Donor source (% living donor) not reported Exclusion criteria: treatment with recombinant human growth hormone or bisphosphonate
Interventions	Treatment group Steroid withdrawal 6 days after transplantation Control group Steroid maintenance Baseline immunosuppression Basiliximab: days 0, 4: 20 mg/m2 TAC: started with 0.15 mg/kg twice daily when creatinine < 2 mg/dL; adjusted to basal levels until day 30: 10 to 15 ng/mL; thereafter: 5 to 7 ng/mL MMF: until day 30: 800 mg/m2/d; day 31 to month 3: 600 mg/m2/d; thereafter: 400 mg/m2/d Steroids Withdrawal group: methylprednisone: day 0 to 2: 2 mg/kg/d; prednisone: day 3: 2 mg/kg/d; day 4: 1 mg/kg/d; day 5: 0.5 mg/kg/d; day 6: 0.25 mg/kg/d; then no further steroids Maintenance group: methylprednisone: day 0 to 2: 2 mg/kg/d; prednisone: day 3 and 4: 2 mg/kg/d; day 5 to month 1: 1.5 mg/kg/d; reduced to 0.12 mg/kg/d until study end
Outcomes	Mortality Graft loss Acute rejection
Notes	Did not report number screened for eligibility
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Stated 'central randomization by the principle investigator'.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Stated 'stratified treatment allocation on the basis of block randomization carried out by a statistician who was not participating in this study using numbered containers by a computerized statistical program'.
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	Open‐label
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Open‐label
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Outcomes are objective hard endpoints
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Unclear whether ITT analysis performed; outcomes for prepubertal patients only reported. Number of events and per group not reported
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Primary outcomes for this review reported
Other bias	Low risk	This study was supported by Fondecyt 1080166 (National Fund for Scientific and Technological Development)