Qadir 2014.

Methods	Study design: randomized controlled trial, parallel group Unit of analysis: participants Number randomized: 50 in total, 25 per group Number of arms: 2 Enrollment start year: not reported Length of follow‐up: 6 months Sample size calculations: not reported Losses to follow‐up: none
Participants	Country: India Age (mean (SD)): 43 (12.6) in the MMC group, 47.3 (11.5) in the EX‐DCR alone group Females (n (%)): 36 (72) in total, 19 (76) in the MMC group, 17 (68) in the EX‐DCR alone group Inclusion criteria: patients with primary acquired nasolacrimal duct obstruction Exclusion criteria: presaccal obstructions, acute dacryocystitis, chronic granulomatous condition, longstanding chronic dacryocystitis with fibrosis of sac, chronic dacryocystitis with fistula, ectropion, entropion, nasal conditions like severe deviated nasal septum, atrophic rhinitis, previous failure of DCR Study group differences: no significant difference in ages; female preponderance in the study but no significant between‐group differences
Interventions	Intervention: EX‐DCR with application of 0.2 mg/mL MMC Comparison intervention: EX‐DCR
Outcomes	Measured outcomes: functional success, defined as the relief of epiphora anatomic success, defined as patency to lacrimal irrigation intraoperative complications Adverse events: injury to nasal mucosa, sac injury, severe bleeding, epistaxis, wound infection
Identification	Author name: Andleeb Ahangar Institution: Department Of Ophthalmology, Government Medical College Srinagar Email: andleebali@gmail.com
Notes	Funding source: not reported Declarations of interest: none Trial registration number: not reported
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Method of random sequence generation was not reported.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Method of allocation concealment was not reported.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Masking of participants and personnel was not reported.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Masking of outcome assessors was not reported.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	There were no missing outcome data.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	No trial or protocol registration available for comparison to ascertain selective outcome reporting.
Other bias	Unclear risk	There was insufficient information to permit a judgement of 'low risk' or 'high risk'.