1. Unuseable published data related to pain at 24 hours.

Studies	Comparison	Subgroup	Reasons
Rabi 2017	Flap design	Triangular vs envelope flap	Pain assessed on a visual scale from no pain to severe pain.
Şimşek Kaya 2019	Flap design	Enveloped flap vs modified triangular flap	Standard deviations were not provided.
Basheer 2017	Bone removal techniques	Piezoelectric vs rotary osteotomy technique	Pain assessed on a visual scale from no pain to severe pain.
Mantovani 2014	Bone removal techniques	Piezoelectric (ultrsound) device vs traditional surgery with bur	Pain assessed at day 2
Acar 2017	Suturing techniques	Horiztonal mattress vs simple interrupted suturing	Unable to calculate MD and SE from data available
Gogulanathan 2015	Suturing techniques	Fibrin sealant vs conventional suturing	Not VAS ‐ numerical scale used
Kumar 2016	Surgical drain	Tube drain vs none	Pain assessed on a visual scale from no pain to severe pain.
Dutta 2016	Wound closure with autologous platelet concentrates	PRF vs none vs PRF + hydroxyapatite	Pain assessed on 6‐point scale.
Kumar 2015	Wound closure autologous with platelet concentrates	Plasma rich fibrin vs none	Data presented as mild, slight, severe.
Unsal 2018	Wound closure autologous with platelet concentrates	PRF vs none	A verbal rating scale was used to evaluate postoperative pain level, which comprised 6 pain severity descriptors: none, mild, moderate, severe, very severe, and excruciating. Not possible to convert this to VAS data
Uyanik 2015	Wound closure autologous with platelet concentrates	Plasma rich fibrin vs none	Data presented as a sum of 7 days.

MD: mean difference; PRF: platelet rich fibrin; SE: standard error; VAS: visual analogue scale; vs: versus.