Dong 2015.

Methods	Study design: randomised controlled trial Study grouping: parallel group Eyes/people: 1 or 2 eyes per person, unclear how the eyes were selected and whether analysed adjusted for within‐person correlation.
Participants	Baseline characteristics Toric IOLs Mean age in years (range):  72 (60–79) Sex (% men): not reported Preoperative astigmatism: corneal: 1.39 (range not reported) Preoperative astigmatism: refractive: 1.30 (range not reported) Number of people (eyes): 33 (42) LRI Mean age in years (range): 73 (60–79) Sex (% men): not reported Preoperative astigmatism: corneal: 1.41 (range not reported) Preoperative astigmatism: refractive: 1.21 (range not reported) Number of people (eyes): 33 (42) Overall Mean age in years (range): 72 (60–79) Sex (% men): 55% Preoperative astigmatism: corneal:  not reported  Preoperative astigmatism: refractive: not reported Number of people (eyes): 66 (84) Inclusion criteria: aged ≥ 60 years; diagnosed senile cataract before surgery; pupils of normal round shape and diameter > 3 mm; hardness of lens nuclear categorised according LOCS – from II to IV level; regular corneal astigmatism within range 1.5–4.0 D. Exclusion criteria: people with retinal disease, glaucoma, keratitis, irregular corneal astigmatism, recent acute eye infections, pterygium; history of ocular trauma and surgical procedure. Pretreatment differences: none reported
Interventions	Intervention characteristics Toric IOLs Type of IOL: Tecnis toric LRI Type of IOL: Tecnis spherical Incision technique: conventional temporal clarity cornea incision phacoemulsification and spherical IOL implantation combined with LRIs on steep axial position.
Outcomes	Visual acuity, corneal astigmatism and refraction Adverse effects: not reported Follow‐up: 3 months
Identification	Sponsorship source: not reported Country: China Authors name:  Yong‐Xiao Dong Email:  187299703@qq.com Conflict of interest: not reported Trial registration ID: not reported Date study conducted: not reported
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Judgement comment: random allocation done using random number table.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: information not provided. We contacted study authors for clarification but received no response.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: information not provided. We contacted study authors for clarification but received no response.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: information not provided. We contacted study authors for clarification but received no response.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: no description of participants who withdrew or were lost to follow‐up. We contacted study authors for clarification but received no response.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	Judgement comment: no access to protocol or trial registration entry. We contacted study authors for clarification but received no response.