Athanassopoulos 1996.

Methods	Quasi‐RCT (by date of birth). Two arms Blinding not mentioned No power calculation Not stated if ITT analysis Follow up 8 months to 27 months
Participants	N = 51. No withdrawals mentioned UDS‐confirmed SUI Combined primary and recurrent. Includes those with previous surgery and with prolapse Mean age: 50 years (range 20‐78), 50.9% menopausal, 14% with previous pelvic operations Inclusion/exclusion criteria not listed No baseline comparison of treatment groups Single‐centre, university‐based hospital Greece
Interventions	I: Burch (27) II: Stamey needle suspension surgery (24) Description of both procedures referenced All done by one surgeon
Outcomes	Number cured Number improved UDS parameters (Qmax, RU, MCC, Pvesmax, Pdet/Qmax, FUL, Pclosmax) Length of stay Complications, Urinary retention Urgency Cure = complete freedom from SUI Failure = persistent or recurrent UI Urinary retention not defined.
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	High risk	"randomly (by date of birth)"
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	High risk	"randomly (by date of birth)"
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	not mentioned
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	not mentioned
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	not mentioned
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	no withdrawals mentioned
Other bias	Unclear risk	no other bias identified