dosages not exact because they are left up to the participants
information on "Arms and Interventions" is empty
Meat percentage in intervention 2 not 13% (as registered) but 12%
intervention not filled out. Information on intervention from summary. No arms specified: Parallel assignment but no comparator treatment mentioned
Dosage and intervals taken from detailed description
Various interventions mentioned. Nothing in the "arms and interventions" section.
Names of PEEP titration methods considered specific enough. No duration of treatment.
No dosage (probably dependent on individual)
Details taken from study description section
Observational trial. Dosage at discretion of investigator.
Excision incorrectly registered as placebo (should be active comparator). No dosage of GnRH-analogue (probably at discretion of physician)
Details on intervention from study description; MTX was given identical to protocol, but additionally ifosfamide, mentioned as protocol amendment in paper.
Dosages are given, but unable to control trial design due to rather complex sequence of dosages and arms
extension period for therapy 5 years in register, 2 years in article
wrong description of relaxation intervention
info from description; target dose correct, but could be adjusted within a range according to article
NA; some differences in injection days, each difference = 1 day
"stimulierte Spontanmeldungen von Unerwünschten Arzneitmittelwirkungen" meaning "simuliert"?
NA; Different intervention, but this is the paper linked as "publication" in the registry
3 points but no time frame or intervals. Does clinicaltrialsregister.eu offter that info?
NA; maximum dose of Nortriptyline differs
Not clear to this assessor what the post-OP directives are. Also two interventions are registered but refer to the same arm and are conducted in sequence. No description of control arm.

no AM, no metric. Why cutpoint of <10mmHg?
no metric, no AM (Presumably mean difference)
no AM, no measure (criteria for IE, Duke criteria?)
No AM, no measure, no metric; Change in kg would have been expected here, given a lack of detail, but reported was the proportion with weight loss > 10%
no AM, no measure (definition of "affected"), no metric
no AM, no measure (identical to inclusion criteria?)
no AM, no measure (definition of questionnaire)
No AM; Follow up after 3 instead of 3.5 years
no AM, no metric, no time frame, no measure
We regard "All cause mortality at 3 years" as specific enough here.
No AM, no time frame; In Paper additional (longer) follow-up times.
Section about interventions empty. Unclear from description
no AM, no total duration. Information from detailed description.
no AM, no time frame, no measure (what is measured about the therapy strategies?)
no AM, no measure. Multiple abbreviations that are not explained: "BV/TV and trab. Sp. measured by 3D pQCT device".
no AM; Can UACR be regarded the same as "albumin exretion"?
Evaluation of safety interpreted as "adverse events". No AM.
No AM, no metric, no measure; Outcome is time to death from all causes in paper (outcomes given in register were also assessed)
no AM; Identified as secondary endpoint in paper
no measure (how are adhesions assessed?)
no AM; not reported, also 6-month-follow-up not reported (mentioned as limitation in the article)
unclear what the primary outcome is, details only given in description
No AM, no metric; (additional primary endpoint in article)
no time frame (duration of "Untersuchungszeitraum")
no AM; Minimal differences between cutpoints in published paper and in register: Acromionslope >=25,7°; Acromionindex >=0,73 vs.  acromion slope 25.0° or more, AI 0,75 or more.
Scale and aggregation missing. Details from description
no AM, no measure (calculation of "Konkordanz")
Assuming "significant difference" refers to difference in mean grades
No time frame, no definition of "arzneimittelbedingt"
no measure (definition of sleep duration or time of day)
no AM, no measure (how are differences calculated?)
"Progression free survival", no AM, no time frame, no measure
no total follow up time, no cutpoint for remission
No time frame, no measure (definition of progression)
no AM, no measure (definition of prediction model)
no AM, time frame unclear; Primary outcome changed, reasons are given in the article
only collected over 6 instead of 24 months