Study	Reason for exclusion
Abdel‐Aleem 2010	This study looked at uterine massage vs active management vs active management plus uterine massage, so it was not a comparison of active and expectant management within the definitions used in the review.
Deneux‐Tharaux 2013	This study was an RCT of active management with and without CCT, so it was not a comparison of active and expectant management within the definitions used in the review.
Gulmezoglu 2012	This study was an RCT of active management with and without CCT, so it was not a comparison of active and expectant management within the definitions used in the review.
Hoffman 2006	Conference abstract available only, but further information on methodology obtained from study authors. Concerns re number of women withdrawn, after randomisation, due to CS
Kashanian 2010	48% of participants excluded in both arms following randomisation
Magann 2006	This study looked at different times of undertaking manual removal of placenta to try to reduce PPH, so it was not a comparison of active and expectant management within the definitions used in the review.
Muller 1996	French conference abstract only, no full publication identified. The translation provided no information on the number of women randomised to each group and so it was not possible to use these data. Previous review authors wrote for further information but had no response. We wrote and received a response from the co‐author, but no further details to add to the published information.
Neri‐Mejia 2016	An RCT of 3 different types of oxytocin administration (IM, IV and infusion)
Ramirez 2001	Insufficient information on the numbers included in each of the 3 arms, and the method of management for the expectant arm.
Vasegh 2005	Insufficient information

CCT: controlled cord traction; CS: caesarean section; IM: intramuscular;IV: intravenous; PPH: postpartum haemorrhage; RCT: randomised controlled trial