Jain 2009.

Methods	Quasi‐randomised controlled trials. Alternately assigned to 1 of 2 groups. Unilateral hernia. Country: India. Setting: the surgery outpatient department of Lok Nayak Hospital, New Delhi. Enrolment dates: not reported.
Participants	Inclusion criteria: Presence of an uncomplicated primary inguinal hernia; subjects eligible for elective inguinal hernia repair using Lichtenstein technique. Exclusion criteria: Recurrent, complicated (irreducible/incarcerated), or femoral hernias; bilateral hernias; concomitant abdominal surgery; ongoing long‐term analgesic or steroid treatment; people receiving antiplatelet agents or anticoagulants; known history of alcohol or drug abuse; any chronic disease affecting outcome of the surgery directly (COPD, cirrhosis, diabetes); severely compromised physical or psychological health. Glue group: 40 participants Mean age (years): 45.65 Male: 100% Type of hernia: right, 70%; left, 30%; indirect, 75%; direct, 25% Suture group: 40 participants Mean age (years): 51.98 Male: 100% Type of hernia: right, 65%; left, 35%; indirect, 70%; direct, 30%
Interventions	Lichtenstein inguinal hernioplasty with 15 cm × 10 cm heavyweight polypropylene mesh. Glue group: gelatin–resorcin–formalin (GRF) glue Suture group: 3‐0 polypropylene interrupted sutures
Outcomes	Recurrences, chronic pain, length of operation, time to discharge, recovery time to normal activity
Notes	Handling of nerves: Not clear. Length of follow‐up: 1 year. Time points of the analysis: 6 months for chronic pain and 1 year for recurrence. Intention‐to‐treat analysis：yes. The number of people randomized: 40 in Glue group; 40 in Suture group The number of people evaluated: 40 in Glue group; 40 in Suture group Information from publication only. No details of funding sources and any declarations of interest provided.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	High risk	Alternately assigned to 1 of 2 groups.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not clear.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Low risk	The participants were blinded for the type of procedure to be performed.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	The follow‐up was performed by a surgery registrar who was blinded for the method of hernia repair employed in the participants.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	All 80 participants had been followed for at least 1 year.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	It is clear that the published reports include all expected outcomes.
Other bias	Unclear risk	Not clear. Without details of funding sources and any declarations of interest.