Villanueva 1996.

Methods	Randomised trial, not double blinded
Participants	Participant characteristics • Number randomly assigned (n = 78) • Age (years): not specified • Sex (male/female): not specified • Duodenal/gastric ulcer: not specified • Forrest group: Ia/Ib = 25, IIa = 53
Interventions	Interventions • Primary intervention: epinephrine injection vs epinephrine injection and polidocanol injection • Medical treatment: ranitidine • Second‐look endoscopy: no • Epinephrine volume: not specified
Outcomes	Outcomes assessed Bleeding rate, surgery rate and mortality • Mortality criteria: hospital mortality • Bleeding criteria: not specified • Emergency surgery
Notes	Abstract report only
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Study authors did not explain sequence generation (abstract)
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Study authors did not explain (abstract)
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Not done: Blinding is virtually impossible in studies on endoscopic treatment. Review authors that this did not introduce significant bias
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	All participants were accounted for in the groups to which they were randomly assigned
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	All prespecified outcomes were reported