Gupta 2006

Methods	2‐arm active‐controlled double‐blinded randomised trial.
Participants	Between dates unspecified, 200 parturients were randomised in a hospital setting in India. The population comprised women of unspecified parity, unspecified whether singleton or multiple pregnancy, at both high and low risk for PPH, who delivered by vaginal delivery. Exclusion criteria were not specified.
Interventions	600 mcg of misoprostol administered rectally (n = 100) versus 10 IU of oxytocin administered intramuscularly (n = 100).
Outcomes	The study recorded the following outcomes: PPH at 500, PPH at 1000, additional uterotonics, transfusion, manual removal of placenta, blood loss (mL). change in Hb level, third‐stage duration (min), nausea, fever, shivering.
Notes	Contact with study authors for additional information: no. Additional data from authors: no.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Randomisation was achieved using computer‐generated random tables.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	A sealed envelope with a code number was opened when vaginal delivery was imminent. The code was not broken till the end of the study.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Low risk	The study was "double‐blind." "Each envelope contained either 3 tablets of 200 mcg misoprostol and an ampoule of normal saline or 3 identical looking placebo tablets and an ampoule of 10 IU oxytocin."
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Assessors were blinded to treatment allocations.
Objective assessment of blood loss	Low risk	Investigators evaluated blood loss by collection with a BRASS‐V calibrated drape placed under the mother. Pre‐weighed gauzes were used to clean any perineal tears or episiotomy. After 1 hour the dry weight of the sponges was subtracted from the soiled weight, and added to the volume of blood collected in the drape on the basis that 1 g is equivalent to 1 mL.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Data were collected completely from all randomised study participants.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	The protocol of the study was unavailable for verification.
Intention to treat analysis	Low risk	All those who were enrolled and randomly allocated to treatment were included in the analysis, in the groups to which they were randomised.
Funding source	Unclear risk	Source(s) of funding for the study were not reported.