Ramirez Villada 2007.

Methods	Type of study: RCT of two groups of men
Participants	Number of participants randomised:93 Losses: 33 Age: mean 69.2 (5.1) Sex: 45 men in exp group; 48 men in control (another control group of 45 women) Health status as defined by authors: healthy Residential status of participants: community dwelling Setting:Cordoba, Spain Inclusion: healthy and physically active, with a practical activity. Regular physical least 2 times a week (walk, fitness gym, dance) not less than one year. Exclusion: deformity of the spine, upper limb or less, amputations, sequelae of fractures, prosthesis, steroid treatment, disease cardiovascular and joint conditions.
Interventions	EXERCISE GROUP (MULTIPLE): continuous vertical and horizontal jumping CONTROL GROUP: not clear from translation Duration and intensity: two training sessions per week for 22 weeks (with sessions separated by 2 to 3 days and duration per session of 50 to 60 minutes, including warm up and cool down) Supervisor: not clear from translation Supervision: not clear from translation Setting: not clear from translation
Outcomes	Backward tandem walk test over 6 metres (s) Compliance/adherence: not clear from translation Adverse events: not clear from translation
Notes	Data presented in graphical form as point estimates only.
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	Insufficient information to permit judgement
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Insufficient reporting of attrition/exclusions to permit judgement
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to permit judgement
Other bias	Low risk	The study appears to be free of other sources of bias
Blinding (participant)	High risk	Not possible
Blinding (assessor)	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to permit judgement
Were the treatment and control group comparable at entry?	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to permit judgement
Was the surveillance active, and of clinically appropriate duration (i.e. at least 3 months post intervention)?	High risk	Only immediately post intervention data, no follow‐up data reported.