Magner 2004.

Methods	Design: double‐blind, prospective, randomized controlled trial. Country: UK Multisite: no International: no Treatment duration: preoperative period Follow‐up: 48 hours postoperatively Operative procedure(s): gynaecological laparoscopy Randomization unit: participants Analysis unit: individual
Participants	141 participants enrolled ASA I female participants aged 21 to 44 years undergoing elective gynaecologic laparoscopy for investigation of infertility Exclusion criteria included: history of congestive heart failure; hypertension; valvular heart disease; diabetes mellitus; epilepsy; relevant drug allergy; established gastrointestinal disease; received antiemetic medication in the 24 hours before surgery; development of intraoperative hypotension; excessive blood loss; surgery involved more than diagnostic laparoscopy. Randomized to: RL‐10 group (n = 71, 50.4%); RL‐30 group (n = 70, 49.6%); 1 participant was excluded for protocol violation. Main characteristics of participants: age (mean, range): RL‐10 33.5 years, 21 to 42; RL‐30 33.0 years, 21 to 44; number of females/males: 141/0.
Interventions	RL‐10 group (control): preoperative bolus of 10 mL/kg Ringer's lactate RL‐30 group (intervention): preoperative bolus of 30 mL/kg Ringer's lactate Co‐interventions: none stated.
Outcomes	Nausea and vomiting/dry retching were assessed using a standardized questionnaire performed 30 minutes after emergence from anaesthesia and at 2, 24, and 48 hours postoperatively. Nausea was assessed using an ordinal scale (severe/moderate/mild/none). Nausea was reported as several dichotomous outcomes: severe nausea or not, severe with antiemetic provided or not, or presence of any severity of nausea or not. Antiemetic use was also documented and reported at the same time points. On the same questionnaire, participants were also queried on the presence or absence of sore throat, dizziness, and thirst. Administration of simple and opiate analgesia was also documented.
Notes	Trial registration: not stated Funder: not stated A priori sample size estimation: stated on page 382 Conducted: dates not stated Declared conflicts of interest: not stated
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Randomization was completed using a computer‐generated random number sequence.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Randomization was completed using a computer‐generated random number sequence.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Fluid was administered in the preoperative area; the participant and perioperative team were not aware of group allocation.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Outcome assessment was completed by a blind investigator.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	No withdrawals were noted.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All outcomes were reported.
Other bias	Low risk	There were no other sources of bias.