| Study | Reason for exclusion |
|---|---|
| Albrecht 2007 | Wrong intervention: not CHM |
| Chai 2008 | Wrong population: not recurrent UTI |
| Ding 2010 | Wrong population: acute UTI |
| Flower 2012 | Observational study with no control group |
| Guo 2013 | Observational study with no control group |
| Hou 2011 | Case history |
| Huang 2007 | Inadequate randomisation: allocation by odd or even number of order of admission |
| Li 2006b | Wrong population: acute UTI |
| Li 2007 | Observational study with no control group |
| Liao 2005 | Observational study with no control group |
| Liu 2005 | Observational study with no control group |
| Liu 2011 | Observational study with no control group |
| Liu 2012a | Inadequate randomisation. This study used a 2:1 randomisation for a very small population with no power calculation. Study compared 20 active versus 10 control participants and 40 active vs. 20 control participants. We do not know if these were sufficient numbers to inform meaningful comparison between groups. Adding these unequal groups together and comparing with Western medicine could create unreliable selection bias |
| Liu 2012b | Did not meet inclusion criteria ‐ it includes both men and women |
| Liu 2013 | Inadequate randomisation, baseline equivalence and outcome measures |
| Lu 2008 | Insufficient reporting of randomisation method |
| Peng 2007 | Wrong interventions: CHM administered by injection |
| Peng 2009 | Insufficient randomisation method reporting and uneven participant allocation |
| Qin 2007 | Inadequate randomisation |
| Shu 2007 | Observational study with no control group |
| Tong 2011 | Wrong population: included men and women |
| Tu 2002 | Observational study with no control group |
| Wang 2009 | An observational study with no control group |
| Wu 2011 | Insufficient reporting on randomisation method |
| Xu 2013 | Insufficient reporting on randomisation method |
| Xu 2009 | Insufficient reporting on randomisation method |
| Yang 2007 | Insufficient reporting on randomisation method |
| Yang 2012 | We found a 20% difference in group size between study arms which suggests poor randomisation, or possibly an undeclared bias or dropout rate that is not accounted for in an ITT analysis. Follow‐up period was for 6 weeks only |
| Yu 2009 | Insufficient information on randomisation method |
| Zhai 2006 | Insufficient information on randomisation method |
| Zhan 2007 | Wrong population: acute UTI |
| Zhang 1998 | Observational study with no control group |
| Zhang 2005b | Observational study with no control group |
| Zhang 2013 | Observational study with no control group |
| Zhou 2007 | Observational study with no control group |
CCHM ‐ Chinese herbal medicine; ITT ‐ intention‐to‐treat; UTI ‐ urinary tract infection