The influence of different sub‐bandage pressure values in the prevention of recurrence of venous ulceration—A 10 year follow‐up.

Category of study designs	Methodological quality criteria	Responses
		Yes	No	Can't tell	Comments
Screening questions (for all types)	S1. Are there clear research questions?	√
	S2. Do the collected data allow to address the research questions?	√
	Further appraisal may not be feasible or appropriate when the answer is ‘No’ or ‘Can't tell’ to one or both screening questions.
Quantitative randomized controlled trials	1. Is randomization appropriately performed?	√			Randomization was computer generated, and patients were randomized into three groups， but it did not introduce the allocation concealment.
	2. Are the groups comparable at baseline?	√			No significant difference was observed between the three study groups according to the CEAP classification (Table 1). The three study groups were comparable in terms of age, sex, general medical history, previous episodes of ulceration, size of the ulcer and duration of the ulcer (Table 2).
	3. Are there complete outcome data?	√			Results are described in the form of combining text and pictures. The content is detailed, and the primary outcome and secondary outcome data are complete.
	4. Are outcome assessors blinded to the intervention provided?			√	Whether the outcome assessors in the article knows who is receiving which interventions are accepting.
	5 Did the participants adhere to the assigned intervention?	√			During the 10‐year follow‐up, 117 of 477 patients (24.52%) did not comply with their randomized compression class.