medication not 2. normal diet significant compared to DBP: -2.6mmHg (SEM: changes. given) normal sodium diet 2.21, CI: -6.93, 1.73) (p>0.001) Note data also given for patients on and not on diuretics, however insufficient information given to calculate Key features for bias assessment of randomised trials Citation Method of Allocation Blinding Loss to Use of Ceasing Reporting all Funding source randomisation concealment study early outcome where for benefit results required Gillies et Unclear risk (no Unclear risk (not Participants: 14.2% loss to No (high risk) No (low risk) Unclear risk Not stated al. (1984), description of described) unclear risk follow up (Insufficient (unclear risk) Australia method of (unclear from data on MAP Providers: high sequence which group) to calculate risk generation) (unclear risk) change in BP) Outcome assessors: unclear risk Summary table
medication not given) 2. normal diet significant changes. compared to normal sodium diet (p>0.001) DBP: -2.6mmHg (SEM: 2.21, CI: -6.93, 1.73) Note data also given for patients on and not on diuretics, however insufficient information given to calculate Key features for bias assessment of randomised trials Citation Method of randomisation Allocation concealment Blinding Loss to Use of where required Ceasing study early for benefit Reporting all outcome results Funding source Gillies et al. (1984), Australia Unclear risk (no description of method of sequence generation) Unclear risk (not described) Participants: unclear risk Providers: high risk Outcome assessors: unclear risk 14.2% loss to follow up (unclear from which group) (unclear risk) No (high risk) No (low risk) Unclear risk (Insufficient data on MAP to calculate change in BP) Not stated (unclear risk) Summary table
Sodium%20Supporting%20Document%201%20%20Systematic%20Literature%20Review.docx