Juarez‐Cedillo 2020.

Study characteristics
Methods	iRCT
Participants	N = 67 (46F/21M) Diagnosis of mild dementia, using DSM‐5 criteria (MMSE 19‐24) Mean MMSE 22.6 (SD 0.9) Age 77.7 (SD 8.2) Outpatients
Interventions	'SADEM' cognitive stimulation groups (N = 39) Treatment‐as‐usual (N = 28)
Outcomes	Cognition: ADAS‐Cog; MMSE; Syndrom‐Kurztest (SKT); verbal fluency (semantic and phonological) Mood: CESD‐R, Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale‐Revised ADL: Rapid Disabilty Rating Scale (RDRS) Behaviour: Blessed Dementia Rating Scale Behaviour problems: NPI Caregiver outcomes (N.B. No data available for these): Zarit Burden Interview; Beck Depression Inventory; Beck Anxiety Inventory
Notes	90 minutes, 2 times a week, for 48 weeks; 12‐month follow‐up
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	The exact randomisation method was unclear.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Randomisation performed by independent researcher
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Evaluators blind to treatment allocation
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	At end of intervention period attrition was low, and intention‐to‐treat analysis was used.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	The results for caregiver outcomes do not appear to be reported. The results for people with dementia appear to include scales not mentioned in the Methods section.
Other bias ‐ training and supervision	Low risk	Some indication training was provided.
Other bias ‐ treatment manual	Low risk	Paper reported a detailed manual was used for the intervention.