Greist 1979.

Methods	RCT
Participants	Community volunteers Age range 18 ‐ 30 53.4% women N = 28
Interventions	1. Supervised running (n = 10). running leader met individually with his participants 3 ‐ 4 times per week for 1 hour, then in the 5th week, only 2 sessions were scheduled with the leader, and in the 7th and 8th weeks, only 1 was scheduled. 2. Time‐limited psychotherapy (n = 6) 3. Time‐unlimited psychotherapy (n = 12)
Outcomes	Symptom checklist score
Notes	Outcome assessment not blind Analysis not intention‐to‐treat
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No information in report
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	High risk	Categorised in BMJ review (Lawlor and Hopker) as inadequate
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) participants	Unclear risk	Not blinded to treatment allocation
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) those delivering intervention	Unclear risk	Those delivering exercise not blinded, effect on bias unclear
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) outcome assessors	High risk	Self report symptom checklist score
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	6/28 dropped out (2/10 in the running group and 4/18 in the psychological groups)
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	Outcome measures were not prespecified. There was no methods section in the paper; after an introduction, the entry criteria were stated and the interventions were described. The first time the outcome measures were described was in the results section.
Other bias	High risk	The authors conclude the paper by saying that "our bias (and we purposely label it as bias that requires additional evaluation) is that running may prove to have antidepressant properties for many individuals with moderate depression". It is possible that this author bias was present before the trial was completed, and so may have influenced results.