Kennis 2004.

Methods	Study design: RCT Study grouping: parallel group, involving 71 people and 98 eyes (but with no further details) Exclusions after randomisation: participants with intraoperative or postoperative complications and posterior capsule opacification were excluded, but no information provided in relation to whether participants were excluded on these grounds. Losses to follow‐up: not reported How missing data were handled: not reported Reported power size calculation? no
Participants	Baseline characteristics Blue‐light filtering IOL group Number of participants: number of people (number of eyes): 22 (32) Sex (number of women/number of men): not reported Age (mean ± SD): 71.8 ± 7.0 years Non‐blue‐light filtering IOL 1 Number of participants: number of people (number of eyes): 23 (33) Sex (number of women/number of men): not reported Age (mean ± SD): 74.9 ± 5.2 years Non‐blue‐light filtering IOL 2 Number of participants: number of people (number of eyes): 26 (33) Sex (number of women/number of men): not reported Age (mean ± SD): 74.7 ± 5.7 years Inclusion criteria: people from 55‐85 years of age who had clinically significant cataract Exclusion criteria: people with ocular pathology other than cataract, neurologic or other disease known to affect contrast sensitivity (e.g. high hyperopia (> +6.0 D), high myopia (> −6.0 D), keratometric cylinder greater than 1.5 D). people with intraoperative or postoperative complications and posterior capsule opacification. Comparison of study groups at baseline: there were no statistically significant differences between groups, with respect to age, mean preoperative refractive error and best‐corrected spectacle acuity, at baseline. However, participants with intraoperative of postoperative complications and posterior capsule opacification were excluded.
Interventions	Intervention characteristics Blue‐light filtering IOL Type of IOL: AcrySoft Natural SN60AT IOL (Alcon) Non‐blue‐light filtering IOL 1 Type of IOL: Tecnis Z9000 IOL (Pfizer) Non‐blue‐light filtering IOL 2 Type of IOL: Sensar AR40e Opti‐Edge IOL (AMO)
Outcomes	BCVA, pupil size and contrast sensitivity under mesopic and photopic conditions (with and without glare), at six months of follow‐up
Identification	Sponsorship source: Funding sources: not reported Declaration of interest: not reported Country: Belgium or Switzerland (unclear which) Setting: eye hospital Comments: Date study conducted: not reported Trial registration number: not reported Contacting study investigators: we attempted to contact the study authors emailed on 1 September 2017 for information relating to the intra‐class correlation coefficient for the within‐person clustering of BCVA; we could not identify a contact email address for any of the authors, as this was not provided on this paper or identifiable from an extensive internet search. As a result we could not include these data in any meta‐analyses. Corresponding author's name: H. Kennis Institution: Department of Ophthalmology, University Hospital, Leuven Email: not reported Corresponding author's address: H. Kennis Dienst Oogziekten UZ Leuven Kapucijnenvoer 33B‐3000 Leuven
Notes	None
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: not reported how list was generated. Study is described as “randomised” but with no further details
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: not reported how allocation administered
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Judgement comment: no information provided on masking
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	Judgement comment: no information provided on masking
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: follow‐up not explicitly reported
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: no access to protocol or trials registry entry
Other bias	Low risk	Judgement comment: no other apparent sources of bias