Edwards 1973.

Methods	Study design: Quasi‐randomized controlled series. Exclusions after allocation: Individuals over 20 years old were excluded from the study because of the small number enrolled. Losses to follow‐up: None. Intention‐to‐treat: Participants aged 20 years and younger were analyzed in the group to which they had been assigned. Sample size calculations: Not reported.
Participants	Country: USA. Dates: 1969 to 1971. Number allocated: 64 consecutive patients alternately assigned to treatment group. Age: Mean 10 years (up to 20 years). Sex: 61 (95%) men and 3 (5%) women. Race: Not reported. Sickle cell disease: Not reported. Participants appeared to be balanced with respect to baseline characteristics. Inclusion criteria: Traumatic hyphema. Exclusion criteria: Individuals over 20 years of age.
Interventions	Treatment: Monocular patching (n = 35) Control: Binocular patching (n = 29) Treatment for both groups included: standard regimen (including position in bed, sedation, and diet); acetazolamide for severe secondary glaucoma; and no topical medications.
Outcomes	Primary and secondary outcomes not specified. Measured outcomes: Risk of secondary hemorrhage Duration of rebleeding Complication rates Final VA Follow‐up: Days 1 to 7.
Notes	Funded by Research to Prevent Blindness Inc, Public Health Service Training Grant, and the National Institutes of Health
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	High risk	Allocation was not randomized: an independent study director assigned participants to treatment groups on an alternate basis by turning a card. Occasionally the card was not turned each time, which led to an uneven number of participants in each group.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	High risk	Allocation was assigned on an alternate basis.
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) Participants	High risk	Masking of participants was not possible given the interventions being studied.
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) Personnel and outcome assessors	Unclear risk	The authors reported that the study was double‐masked, although this statement was not clear. The study investigators seldom participated in participant care to allow other examiners with less experience in monocular patching to collect data in hopes of minimizing observation bias.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Primary outcome	Unclear risk	Individuals over 20 years of age were excluded after allocation to treatment group.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Secondary outcomes	Unclear risk	Individuals over 20 years of age were excluded after allocation to treatment group.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Reported results for all outcomes
Other bias	Low risk	No other sources of potential bias were identified.