Gong 2017.

Study characteristics
Methods	Study design: RCT Dates study conducted: February 2012‐April 2015
Participants	Number of participants: 210 eligible; 198 randomised; 198 reported Setting: First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University (FAH‐CMU) Country: China Population: women Age (mean ± SD): A 46.14 ± 8.33; B 45.70 ± 9.63 Inclusion criteria: patients with cervical cancer FIGO stage IB‐IIB Condition for hospitalisation: radical hysterectomy Exclusion criteria: patients were excluded if they had urinary incontinence, interstitial cystitis, cognitive impairment or difficulties in completing the training sheet Use of antibiotic prophylaxis: not reported
Interventions	Group A (n = 70): IUC for 48 h with intermittent clamping Group B (n = 128): IUC for 48 h without intermittent clamping Size and type of catheter used: not reported Study definition of short‐term catheterisation (days): not reported Intended duration of catheterisation for each group: A: 48 h B: 48 h
Outcomes	Recatheterisation Residual urine volume 24 h after removal CAUTI Duration of first catheterisation (days)
Definition of CAUTI or bacteriuria	Symptomatic UTI was defined as bacteriuria with fever, frequent or painful urination or burning on urination
Sponsorship/funding	None
Ethical approval	The Institutional Review Board of Chongqing Medical University approved the study (File No.: 2012045), and all patients provided written informed consent.
Notes	In the clamping group, bladder reconditioning was performed 2 days before IUC removal. The participants did the intermittent clamping, while the nurses performed the catheter insertion and removal. A designed training sheet was handed to the participants, who were educated on how to clamp the IUC and finish the sheet. In detail, IUCs were clamped for 4 h or until participants had urination desire, followed by a 5‐min urinary drainage, a cycle repeated in the daytime for 2 days. The schedule was chosen because it appeared to mimic a normal pattern of bladder filling and emptying
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "All patients were randomised on 2:1 using a computer‐generated list into two groups, the clamping group and the control group" Comment: adequate method of randomisation
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not reported
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Quote: "Both the researchers and the patients were not blind to the group assignment due to the procedure of the study" Comment: not possible to blind participants due to type of intervention
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	Quote: "Outcome assessors were not blinded in the study..." Comment: outcome assessors not blinded
Blinding of microbiological outcome (detection bias)	Low risk	Urine samples would be sent to a laboratory where the allocation of a participant would not be known
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Quote: "Five patients were excluded from the clamping group (three failed to record the training sheet, two had severe urine leakage during clamping because of the unfitted catheters and the catheters were removed without training). Seven patients in the control group dropped out because the catheters were removed in other hospitals and the data were missing.” Comment: adequate reasons for exclusion
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Outcomes mentioned under Methods section are reported in Results. All outcomes expected from the objective of this trial are reported.
Other bias	Low risk	Appears to be free from other sources of bias