Thush 2009.

Methods	RCT.
Participants	125 Dutch at‐risk adolescents.
Interventions	MI plus information flyers (n=61) vs information flyers only (n=64).
Outcomes	Physiological primary: None. Non‐physiological primary: Alcohol use. Secondary: Readiness to change using a readiness‐to‐change ruler. Data not reported. Follow‐ups at 1 month and 6 months.
Notes	Email sent to Thush requesting raw outcome data on May 28th 2010. Thush replied immediately promising to look into it. They have computed a log transformed standardized alcohol use index score out of six different correlated alcohol use outcome measures. A reminder was sent on August 30th. An out of office reply informed that Thush had resigned.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	"randomly assigned"
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to permit judgement.
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) Patients and providers	High risk	No blinding.
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) Assessors	Unclear risk	It is not stated whether assessors were blinded.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	10% lost to follow‐up at 1 month and 41% lost to follow‐up at 6 months. Reasons not provided. Balanced at 1 month. Not known whether loss was balanced at 6 months. Not ITT.
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. Differences between groups at baseline were not reported.