Summary of findings 2. Rho kinase inhibitor compared to beta‐blocker.

Population: people with primary open‐angle glaucoma or ocular hypertension Settings: ophthalmology clinics Intervention: netarsudil 0.02% once per day Comparison: timolol 0.5% twice per day
Outcomes	Illustrative absolute effect (or risk) * (95% CI)		Risk difference (95% CI)	No. of participants (RCTs)	Certainty of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk  with timolol	Corresponding risk with netarsudil
Glaucoma progression at 12 months, measured by additional visual field defects	—	—	—	—	—	Not measured
Difference in mean IOP from baseline at < 6 months	4.60 mmHg lower (3.91 to 5.29)	3.94 mmHg lower (3.69 to 4.19)	0.66 mmHg higher (0.41 to 0.91)	1415 (3 RCTs)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ Lowa	—
Glaucoma progression at 12 months, defined by anatomic (structural) criteriab	—	—	—	—	—	Not measured
Patient‐reported outcome at the longest follow‐up	—	—	—	—	—	Not measured
Mean change in the number of glaucoma medications at the longest follow‐up	—	—	—	—	—	Not measured
Need for additional treatment at the longest follow‐up	—	—	—	—	—	Not measured
Number of ocular adverse events at the longest follow‐up	9 events per 100 person‐months	30 events per 100 person‐months (23 to 36)	21 more events per 100 person‐months (14 to 27)	1678 (4 RCTs)	⊕⊕⊕⊝ Moderatec	—
BB: beta‐blocker; CI: confidence interval; IOP: intraocular pressure; RD: rate difference; ROKi: rho kinase inhibitor. *The basis for the assumed effect (or risk) is the effect (or risk) in the Timolol group across studies. The corresponding effect (or risk and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the difference in the effect (or risk) of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High certainty: further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate certainty: further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low certainty: further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low certainty: we are very uncertain about the estimate.

^aDowngraded two levels for risk of bias: high risk of bias due to deviation from the intended intervention and missing outcome.
^bAnatomic criteria may include thinning of neuroretinal rim at the optic disk, thinning of the peripapillary retinal nerve fiber layer, or thinning of the macular ganglion cell layer.
^cDowngraded one level for risk of bias in incomplete outcome reporting or selective outcome reporting.