Yan 2004.

Methods	Study design: parallel‐group randomized controlled trial (11 participants both eyes included) Number randomized: 63 eyes of 52 participants total; 36 eyes of 28 participants in trabeculectomy + AMT group; 27 eyes of 24 participants in trabeculectomy group Exclusions after randomization: none reported Losses to follow‐up: none reported Unit of analysis: eye Number analyzed: 63 eyes of 52 participants total; 36 eyes of 28 participants in trabeculectomy + AMT group; 27 eyes of 24 participants in trabeculectomy group How were missing data handled?: no missing data Power calculation: not reported
Participants	Country: China Mean age: mean age not reported; age range 45 to 76 years; not reported by intervention group Gender: 25/52 (48%) men and 27/52 (52%) women overall; not reported by intervention group Inclusion criteria: PACG Exclusion criteria: not specified Equivalence of baseline characteristics: yes
Interventions	Intervention 1: trabeculectomy + AMT Intervention 2: trabeculectomy Length of follow‐up: Planned: not reported Actual: 6 months
Outcomes	Primary and secondary outcomes not distinguished Outcomes, as reported: depth of anterior chamber, IOP, visual acuity, filtering bleb, surgical success, complications Intervals at which outcomes assessed: 1 day, 1 week, 2 weeks, and 1, 3, and 6 months
Notes	Publication type: published article Funding sources: not reported Disclosures of interest: not reported Trial registry: not registered Study period: not reported Subgroup analyses: none reported Publication language: Chinese Authors not contacted
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Random sequence generation was not reported
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Allocation concealment was not reported
Masking of participants and personnel (performance bias)	Unclear risk	Masking of participants and personnel was not reported
Masking of outcome assessment (detection bias)	High risk	It is not possible to mask outcome assessors, as devices can be seen during eye examination
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	The number of participants with missing or incomplete outcome assessment was not reported
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	Protocol was not available. Surgical success and visual acuity were reported in the Results section, but were not mentioned in the Methods section
Other bias	Unclear risk	Did not report source of funding or conflict of interest. This article provided nothing on study design; we contacted the authors but did not receive a response