Torkamani 2010.

Methods	Clinical trial with women equally divided into 2 groups. Information available understood to be random allocation.
Participants	Women 16‐28 years of age gravida 1 or 2 gestational age 38‐42 week
Interventions	Immersion in water during first and second stage of labour (100 women) Control group described as 'normal delivery' Active management of labour was undertaken, with use of oxytocin use for ineffective contractions or lack of cervical progress in 2 hours. Promethazine available analgesia with no indication if this resulted in exit from the pool, as the use of this drug would exclude water use in many locations. No indication of 1:1 care.
Outcomes	Duration of first stage of labour Duration of second stage of labour pain score percentage who used analgesia percentage who received oxytocin percentage who had episiotomy percentage who had normal birth percentage who had Apgar score lower than 8 percentage of Woman's satisfied with mode of delivery
Notes	Conducted in Asalian Gynaecological hospital in Iran. The full name of the lead author paper that was initially labelled as by author Akbari 2008 ‐ is Soheila Akbari Torkamani and has be renamed according. This is 1 trial with 2 publications. Dates of trial: February 2006 to February 2007 Funding: not reported Declaration of interest: not reported
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No information provided
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No information provided
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	High risk of bias because women and carers could not be blind to group allocation after randomisation due to the nature of the intervention
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	No information provided
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	No attrition data provided,however most of outcome data are provided as percentages (see above) and on trying to convert this data to numbers it is evident that data are missing, appears to have different data missing for different outcomes and therefore could not be converted to numbers for analysis
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	Women who required a caesarean section after apparently consenting and entering the trial were excluded indicating analysis was not by ITT. There are no data on the number of such women in each group
Other bias	Unclear risk	No information on type of pool used