| Brøndsted et al, 2015[8]
|
Random sequence generation (selection bias) |
Low risk |
Randomization was performed on the day of the surgery using automated, computerized block-randomization lists with a 1:1 allocation ratio and a block size of 9 |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) |
Low risk |
The participants were masked to IOL type |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) |
Low risk |
The IOL type was masked to the participants, but impossible to the investigator |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) |
Low risk |
Statistical analyses were performed after a complete re-masking of the data post hoc. Masking was not broken before all statistical analyses had been performed |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) |
Low risk |
72/73 included participants completed the 3-week postoperative visit |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) |
Low risk |
Important outcomes were reported |
| Other bias |
Low risk |
Not likely |
| Ayaki et al, 2015[6]
|
Random sequence generation (selection bias) |
Unclear risk |
Nonrandomized trial with consecutive patients enrolled |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) |
Unclear risk |
Not reported |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) |
Unclear risk |
Not reported |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) |
Unclear risk |
Not reported |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) |
Low risk |
All included patients completed the 2mo and 7mo postoperative follow-up visit |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) |
Low risk |
Important outcomes were reported |
| Other bias |
Low risk |
Not likely |
| Alexander et al, 2014[3]
|
Random sequence generation (selection bias) |
Unclear risk |
Dual-site study. Patients operated on in Oxford received UVF-IOL (SA60AT); those operated on in Windsor received BF-IOL (SN60AT) |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) |
High risk |
Neither investigators nor patients were masked to IOL allocation |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) |
Unclear risk |
Not likely to blind patients or personnel |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) |
Unclear risk |
Not reported |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) |
Low risk |
1482 recruited, 961 completed study; in UVF IOL group, 44 patients (9%) dropped out and in BF-IOL group, 100 patients (22%) dropped out before 1mo postoperation |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) |
Low risk |
Important outcomes were reported |
| Other bias |
Unclear risk |
Not reported |
| Ayaki et al, 2014[7]
|
Random sequence generation (selection bias) |
Unclear risk |
Nonrandomized trial, consecutive patients enrolled |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) |
Unclear risk |
Not likely |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) |
Unclear risk |
Not likely |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) |
Unclearrisk |
Not reported |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) |
Low risk |
All included patients completed the 7mo postoperative follow-up visit |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) |
Low risk |
Important outcomes were reported |
| Other bias |
Unclear risk |
Not reported |
| Wei et al, 2013[13]
|
Random sequence generation (selection bias) |
Unclear risk |
Nonrandomized, pre-test/post-test experiment |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) |
High risk |
Not likely |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) |
Unclear risk |
Not reported |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) |
Low risk |
Investigators did not tell subjects supposed relationship between IOL and sleep quality |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) |
Low risk |
All included patients completed the 1mo postoperative follow-up visit |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) |
Low risk |
Important outcomes were reported |
| Other bias |
Unclear risk |
Not reported |
| Ayaki et al, 2013[5]
|
Random sequence generation (selection bias) |
Unclear risk |
Nonrandomized trial, consecutive patients enrolled |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) |
Unclear risk |
Not likely |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) |
Unclear risk |
Not reported |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) |
High risk |
Not likely |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) |
Low risk |
All included patients completed the 2mo postoperative follow-up visit |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) |
Unclear risk |
Most important outcomes were reported |
| Other bias |
Unclear risk |
Not reported |
