Yang 2007.

Methods	Type of study: RCT
Participants	Number of participants randomised: 59 non equal randomisation to allow for more dropouts in exercise group Losses: 10 of 59 (7 exercise gp and 3 control gp) Age: mean (SD) 80.2 (9.02) Taiji Qigong, 80.9 (7.97) control. Sex: men and women, no numbers given. Health status as defined by authors: healthy Residential status of participants: community dwelling and senior living facilities Setting: USA. Inclusion: Community dwelling, aged > 60 Exclusion: < age 60, Berg balance score < 40, MSQ < 5 out of 8, Parkinsons Disease, stroke or other neurological disease, certain medications.
Interventions	EXERCISE GROUP (3D): (n = 33) Moderate Taiji Qigong (same form used by Wolf 1997). CONTROL GROUP (n = 16): usual activities Duration and intensity: 6 months, 3 times 1 hour per week Supervisor: Taiji instructor. Supervision: group exercise sessions. Setting: senior centres.
Outcomes	SOT ‐ Sensory organisation Test ‐ vestibular ratio and visual ratio Quiet stance (cm2) Compliance/adherence: not reported Adverse events:not reported
Notes	Also assessed feet opening angle on standing (degrees) and base of support (BoS) Another 19 participants in exercise group not randomised as wanted to do Taiji but their data was not included in analysis.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Computer randomisation
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Participants assigned by unique number
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Generalised Estimate Equations used to compute ‐ estimates of effect used for missing data
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	Not reported, nurse did tests but unclear as to whether 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	Only immediately post intervention data, no follow‐up data reported.