Hagglund 1989.

Methods	Randomized, placebo‐controlled trial; 2 parallel groups. Unit of randomization: individual.
Participants	Dates of data collections: July 1983 and December 1986. Setting: University Hospital, Lund, Sweden. Inclusion criteria: women undergoing emergency CS (during labor and/or after rupture of membranes [duration not specified]); categorized as "both" for this review. N = 160. Exclusion criteria: fever > 38oC, given antibiotics, chemotherapy or immunosuppressive therapy in prior 3 weeks, allergy to cephalosporins, alcohol or drug abuse, chronic disease of cardiovascular, renal, hepatic or gastrointestinal system, severe anemia.
Interventions	Intervention: cefuroxime 1.5 g IV at the start of the operation and 12 hrs later; N = 80. Comparison: placebo: saline placebo; N = 80.
Outcomes	Endometritis (fever > 38oC twice at least 1 hr apart, after the 1st post‐operative day, and increased tenderness of the uterus); wound infection (redness, tenderness, increased heat and edema of wound); UTI.
Notes	There were no cases of septicemia or abscess formation observed in either group. Only 55% of women had ruptured membranes (number > 6 hs not stated) and 77% were in labor; these definitions do not meet our criteria for non‐elective section, categorized as 'both'. Class of antibiotic: 2nd generation cephalosporin. Subgroups: both elective and non‐elective CS; before cord clamping. The 2 groups were comparable regarding age, parity, previous CS, complications during pregnancy and gestational age at the operation.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Quote: "...a pre‐set randomized series in a double‐blind manner...". Comment: no description of sequence generation process.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Comment: no information provided.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Comment: no losses or exclusions were reported. It appears to be an ITT analysis.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to judge.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Quote: "double‐blind". Comment: placebo‐controlled (saline).
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Comment: insufficient information to judge.
Other bias	Low risk	Comment: no other sources of bias identified.