Li 1994.

Methods	Country where data collected: China Parallel‐group RCT Unit of randomisation: participant Unit of analysis: participant Duration: NR (until healing)
Participants	Inclusion criteria: people with deep second‐degree burn wounds 1%‐12% TBSA and aged 16‐70 Exclusion criteria: NR Participants: 115 hospital patients Mean age (years): NR Male participants: 84/115 Burn type: NR Burn degree: second‐degree Burn size (%TBSA): NR (about 100 cm2) Burn location: NR
Interventions	Intervention arm 1: Moist burn ointment (MEBO) every 6 h. N = 31 Intervention arm 2: 0.25% iodophor every 6 h. N = 24 Intervention arm 3: 1% Rivanol every 6 hs. N = 22 Intervention arm 4: SSD every 6 h. N = 38 Cointerventions: antibiotics for 3‐10 days
Outcomes	Primary outcome: wound healing Secondary outcome: cost
Notes	Funding NR Article in Chinese, extracted and assessed for risk of bias by one review author, discussed with a second review author
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Comment: a random component in the sequence generation process was not reported in detail
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Comment: it did not state how randomisation sequence was allocated
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Comment: not mentioned
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Comment: results section and tables show that all participant data were included in analysis
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Comment: protocol not obtained, based on paper only
Other bias	Unclear risk	The whole process of conducting this RCT was not clear