Boshuizen 2005.

Methods	Type of study: RCT
Participants	Number of participants randomised: 73 Losses: 23 of 72 from 3 arms (plus 1 drop out before pre‐test) N = 33 completers in two arms plus 17 controls = 50 Age: mean (SD) 80.0 (6.7) high guidance group, 79.3 (7) medium guidance group, 77.2 (6.5) control group. Sex: high guidance group ‐ all women, medium guidance group ‐ 2 men, control group ‐ 2 men. Health status defined by authors: Healthy Residential status of participants: Community living (inc blocks with apartments for elderly) Setting: Netherlands. Inclusion: difficulty getting up from chair. Exclusion: maximum knee extensor torque over 87.5 Nm, self reported disease adversely affected by exercise.
Interventions	EXERCISE GROUP High guidance Intervention group (STRENGTH) (n = 16): strengthening exercises of lower limbs with theraband and increasing resistance in sitting and standing 2 exercise classes supervised by therapist plus 1 unsupervised. EXERCISE GROUP Medium guidance intervention group (STRENGTH) (n = 16): strengthening exercises of lower limbs with theraband and increasing resistance in sitting and standing 1 exercise class supervised by therapist plus 2 unsupervised home sessions CONTROL GROUP (n = 17): usual activity. Duration and intensity: HG ‐ 10 weeks of 2 x 1hour supervised classes per week and 1 self supervised home session, MG ‐ 10 weeks of 1 x 1hour supervised classes per week and 2 self supervised home session Supervisor: physical therapist for exercise groups. Supervision: group exercise classes for exercise groups and self home exercises. Setting: community.
Outcomes	20 metre walk test (s). TUG (s). Tandem stance (s) Compliance/adherence: in high guidance exercise group 73% In medium guidance 76% Adverse events: not reported
Notes	Trial had 3 arms but NSD between 2 interventions therefore data taken from 'High guidance' group
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to permit judgement
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not described
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Characteristics of participants and drop‐outs presented in a table
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Intervention described and outcomes presented as prespecified
Other bias	Unclear risk	Randomisation adjusted to have fewer in control group
Blinding (participant)	High risk	Not possible
Blinding (assessor)	Low risk	Assessors blinded
Were the treatment and control group comparable at entry?	Low risk	No differences reported on baseline characteristics with a potential to influence the effect of the intervention
Was the surveillance active, and of clinically appropriate duration (i.e. at least 3 months post intervention)?	High risk	Pre and post ‐ no follow‐up after 10 week intervention