Walters 2009.

Methods	Dismantling RCT.
Participants	279 heavy drinking college students. USA.
Interventions	(1) A single MI session without feedback (MIO, n=70), (2) a single MI session with feedback (MIF, n=73), (3) web feedback only (FBO, n=67), or (4) assessment only (AO, n=69).
Outcomes	Physiological primary: None. Non‐physiological primary: Drinks per week, estimated peak BAC. Secondary: None.
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	"Randomization, stratified by sex and heavy‐drinking frequency (i.e., one heavy episode in the past 2 weeks vs. more than one heavy episode), was completed automatically after the students entered their screening data."
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	Unclear risk	10% attrition at 3 months and 14% attrition at 6 months. Different across groups. No reasons. ITT not conducted.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	The published report included all expected outcomes based on the study hypotheses.
Other bias	Unclear risk	The feedback format varied (i. e. online vs. face‐to‐face) and MIO and MIF conditions varied in contact time because of the feedback component. There were no differences between groups at baseline.