Stein 2002.

Methods	RCT.
Participants	187 US AUDIT‐positive active injection drug users.
Interventions	MI (n= 95) vs control (assessment only) (n= 92).
Outcomes	Physiological primary: None. Non‐physiological primary: Number of drinking days. Secondary: None.
Notes	BRAINE study.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	"Subjects were assigned to treatments using a randomisation schedule created with permuted blocks of eight assignments."
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	"The data manager prepared the randomisation schedule before the first patient enrolled."
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) Patients and providers	High risk	No blinding.
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) Assessors	Low risk	"At each follow‐up assessment, research assistants were blinded to the treatment condition of the subject."
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	3% loss to follow‐up at 6 months. Balanced. No reasons provided. ITT performed. Missing data were imputed using a 'worst case scenario' strategy.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	The published report included all expected outcomes based on the study hypotheses.
Other bias	Unclear risk	Only self‐reported outcomes. There were no differences between groups at baseline.