Li 2016.

Methods	Design: 2 arms Country: China Method of randomisation: randomly divided into experimental and control groups using a randomised number table Blinding: double‐blind Location: Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, China Medical University Stomatologic Hospital Length of follow‐up: 8 months
Participants	Diagnosis: children with mixed IHs in the oral and maxillofacial regions Sex: 18 female, 13 male Age: between 2 and 11 months Inclusion criteria: patients of less than 1 year of age, and the presence of mixed haemangioma (located in the papillary dermis, reticular dermis, and subcutaneous tissue) with functional or cosmetic deformity Exclusion criteria: history of previous treatment for IHs (such as laser or steroid), heart disease, cardiac arrhythmia, asthma, broncho‐obstructive disease, PHACE syndrome, and prematurity Number of randomised children: 31
Interventions	Intervention A (number of children: 14): oral propranolol in combination with topical timolol maleate Intervention B (number of children: 17): oral propranolol treatment alone
Outcomes	Primary Outcome A: Changes of size and colour of the haemangioma were assessed by B‐ultrasound and photographs at the onset of treatment, between treatment intervals, and at the conclusion of treatment. Secondary Outcome B: The visual analogue scale was compared with the response to treatment.
Notes	Trial registration: not stated Funder: not stated Role of funder: not stated A priori sample size estimation: not stated Conducted: March 2013 to June 2014 Declared conflicts of interest: not reported
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "Patients were randomly divided into experimental and control groups using a randomised number table." Page 56 Comment: Authors reported information about adequate random sequence generation.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	There was insufficient information to assess this item as low or high.
Blinding of participants (Performance bias)	Unclear risk	Despite participants being aware of intervention group assigned, it is unclear whether this had an impact or not on the trial results.
Blinding of personnel (performance bias)	Unclear risk	Despite researchers being aware of intervention group assigned, it is unclear whether this had an impact or not on the trial results.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Quote: "Three independent surgeons blind to the patients assessed the efficacy by analysing the clinical photograph at baseline and the end of the treatment." Page 57 Comment: Authors reported information about adequate blinding of outcome assessment.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	No children were lost at follow‐up.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Selective reporting was not detected.
Other bias	Low risk	No other biases were identified.