Table 2

Reporting of ITT principles

Author	ITT principles followed?	Treatment violators?	How treatment violators were managed?	Missing data?	How missing data were managed?
Black and Teti³⁸	No	Unclear	Non-attenders were indistinguishable from non-responders.	Yes	Data were excluded, but drop outs were compared with the others for demographic variables and first visit data (baseline).
Blakemore et al³⁹	No	No	No comment given/reported.	No
Cunningham et al⁴⁰	No	Yes	Non-attenders were included in analysis where outcome data were available.	Yes	Drop out from all three groups before and after randomisation. Data were excluded, but did detailed analysis of demographic characteristics of drop outs and participants by treatment group.
Gammon and Rose⁴¹	No	No	No comment given/reported.	No
Greaves⁴²	No	No	No comment given/reported.	No
Gross et al⁴³	No	Yes	One lost in treatment through illness was excluded from inferential analysis.	Yes	Early pre-treatment drop outs were analysed as separate control group.
Irvine et al⁴⁴	Yes	Yes	All data were used where possible regardless of treatment attendance.	Yes	The analytical method used allowed data on individual with missing data at some time points to be included, although the missing data themselves are still not accounted for.
Joyce⁴⁵	No	No	No comment given/reported.	No
Koniak-Griffin et al⁴⁶	No	No	No comment given.	No
Lagges and Gordon⁴⁷	No	Yes	Included those missing some of the sessions where outcome data were available.	Yes	Excluded all those with missing data. In addition the only two male respondents were excluded from the analysis.
McGillicuddy et al⁴⁸	No	Yes	Reports overall attendance was 89%. Those missing sessions were followed up with handouts and were included where outcome data were available.	Yes	Excluded all those with missing data and one additional parent from the skills training programme based outlier scores for parental anxiety.
Nicholson et al⁵⁰	No	No	Those missing a session had their session rescheduled.	Yes	Data excluded only when missing for relevant analyses.
Nixon and Singer⁵¹	No	Unclear	Non-attenders were indistinguishable from non-responders.	Yes	Data were excluded for drop outs
Odom⁵²	No	Yes	Non-attenders were excluded	Yes	Data were excluded for dropouts
Patterson et al⁵³	Yes	Yes	Included those missing some of the sessions where outcome data were available.	Yes	Data excluded only when missing for relevant analyses. However, exclusion is only due to non-completion of outcome measures and may not depend on treatment.
Pisterman et al⁵⁴ (combined studies)	No	Yes	Unclear whether excluded those not attending treatment.	Yes	Data were excluded for drop outs.
Pisterman et al⁵⁵(study 2)	No	Yes	Limited comment made, but did not seem to exclude those missing some of the sessions.	Yes	Data were excluded for early drop outs.
Sheeber and Johnson⁵⁸	No	Yes	Non-attender was excluded	Yes	Data were excluded for drop out
Sirbu et al⁵⁹	No	No	No comment given/reported.	No
Spaccarelli et al⁶⁰	No	Yes	Non-attenders were excluded.	Yes	Data were excluded for drop outs, but did an attrition analysis to see what factors affect likelihood of attrition.
Truss et al⁶²	No	Yes	Non-attenders were partially excluded. Those only missing sessions were analysed as separate control group.	Yes	Data were excluded for drop outs.
Taylor et al.⁶¹	Yes	Yes	Non-attenders were followed up by therapist and data collected where possible. These included in analysis.	Yes	Excluded all those with missing data (no special analysis of non-attenders, for example, sensitivity analyses).
Van Wyk et al⁶³	No	No	No comment given/reported.	No
Webster-Stratton et al⁶⁴	No	Yes	Non-attenders were excluded when missing more than 50% of sessions.	Yes	Excluded all those with missing data.
Wolfson et al⁶⁵	No	No	No apparent treatment violation.	Yes	Excluded all those with missing data from the relevant analyses.
Zimmerman and Jacobsen⁶⁶	No	Yes	Non-attenders were excluded when missing more than two sessions.	Yes	Excluded all those with missing data.