Brown 1996.

Methods	Study design: Parallel group RCT
Participants	Country: USA Setting: Eye hospital Intervention group: NSAIDs alone Number of people (eyes) randomised: NR Number (%) of people followed up: NR Average age in years: NR Age range in years: NR Percentage women: NR Ethnic group: NR Percentage with diabetes: NR (but people with DR excluded) Percentage with uveitis: 0 (people with uveitis excluded) Comparator: Steroids alone Number of people (eyes) randomised: NR Number (%) of people followed up: NR Average age in years: NR Age range in years: NR Percentage women: NR Ethnic group: NR Percentage with diabetes: NR (but people with DR excluded) Percentage with uveitis: 0 (people with uveitis excluded) Inclusion criteria: Undergoing phacoemulsification with posterior capsular opacification after lens (PCOL) implantation. Exclusion criteria: History of systemic or ocular inflammation (iritis, uveitis); taking oral or ophthalmic steroids or NSAIDs; other ocular disease such as glaucoma, corneal disease, or diabetic retinopathy. Pretreatment: Group differences not reported. Eyes: Unclear if one or both eyes included.
Interventions	Intervention group: NSAIDs alone diclofenac sodium 0.1% (Voltaren Ophthalmic, Ciba Vision Ophthalmics Duluth, Ga) Times per day: 4 times a day for 7 days; twice a day for 21 days Duration preoperative: days: 0 Duration postoperative: days: 28 Comparator: Steroids alone prednisolone acetate 1% (Pred Forte, Allergan) Times per day: 4 times a day for 7 days; twice a day for 21 days Duration preoperative: days: 0 Duration postoperative: days: 28 All patients had gentamicin drops for 7 days postoperative. Type of surgery: Phacoemulsification
Outcomes	Follow‐up: 1 month Laser flare‐cell photometry (mean value of anterior chamber flare reported, photons) but was not possible to calculate SD so not used in the analysis.
Contact details	Authors name: Rose Marie Brown Institution: New York Hospital ‐ Cornell Medical Center Email: NR Address: Cornell University Medical College, 520 E. 70th St, Starr 817, New York, NY 10021
Notes	Funding sources: "Supported in part from a grant from Ciba Vision Ophthalmics, Duluth, Ga." Declaration of interest: NR Date study conducted: 1991 Trial registration number: NR Contacting study investigators: Trial authors not contacted.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Quote "We conducted a prospective, randomised study." "The patients were randomly assigned to receive..." Judgement comment: Not reported how list was generated. Study was described as “randomised” but with no further details.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: Not reported how allocation administered. Study was described as “randomised” but with no further details.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Judgement comment: No information on masking. We assume that in absence of reporting on this, patients and personnel were not masked.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: For measurement of inflammation ‐ Quote: "Neither examiner knew which of the study groups the patient was enrolled in." But for other outcomes, masking not mentioned.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: Follow‐up not reported. Unclear how many people seen at 1 month.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: No access to protocol or trials registry entry.