Lee 2013.

Study characteristics
Methods	Study design‐ double‐blinded, randomised, active‐controlled, parallel‐design, phase III study in glabellar lines (Poster) Study date‐ no information Study setting‐ no information
Participants	Randomised 314 participants. Age‐ no information. Gender ‐ no information Inclusion criteria‐ no information Exclusion criteria‐ no information Severity of disease‐ moderate to severe glabellar lines at maximal contraction Ethnicity‐ no information
Interventions	Duration of study‐ 16 weeks Intervention New BontA (20 U) [Medytox®] (N = 157) Comparator OnabotulinumtoxinA (20 U) (N = 157) Ratio‐ 1:1 (New BontA[Medytox®]: OnabotulinumtoxinA)
Outcomes	Primary outcome Responder rate by the investigator's live assessment at maximum frown at week 4 Secondary outcomes Responder rates by investigator's live assessment with frowning and at rest at weeks 8, 12 and 16, with additional photographic assessment by a panel of blinded raters four weeks after the injections Subjective satisfaction Adverse events
Notes	WS Lee worked in the Medical Department of Medytox Inc., Ochang, South Korea
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Quote: "patients was randomised at a 1:1 ratio to receive 20U of toxin" page 116 Comment: we considered unclear risk of bias because the authors did not explain how they randomised the participants
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Quote: "patients was randomised at a 1:1 ratio to receive 20U of toxin" page 116 Comment: we considered unclear risk of bias because the authors did not explain the methods used for maintain the allocation concealment
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Quote: "double‐blinded" page 116 Comment: we considered this unclear risk of bias because the authors did not explain how they blinded the participants
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Quote: "double‐blinded" page 116 Comment: we considered this unclear risk of bias because the authors did not explain how they blinded the outcome assessors
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	No information about losses Comment: we considered unclear risk of bias
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	Incomplete data. The authors reported only the outcomes assessed at week 4 Comment: we considered this high risk of bias We e‐mailed authors on June 21, 2018, but the electronic address was wrong and we could not find a valid e‐mail.
Other bias	Unclear risk	The author worked for Medy‐tox Comment: we considered this a unclear risk of bias