Table 20: Summary of GRADE Quality Assessment for Nutritional Supplementation^*.

Intervention	No. of Studies	Quality Assessment				Summary of Findings
							No. of Patients		Effect (RR [95% CI])
		Design	Quality	Consistency	Directness	Other	Interv	Control		Quality
Vitamin D: Men and women	3	RCT	No serious limitations	Consistent	Direct	None	383	369	0.94 [0.77–1.14]	High
		High	High	High	High	High
Vitamin D: Women	1	RCT	Serious limitations†	Only 1 study	Direct	None	70	67	0.55 [0.29–1.08]	Moderate
		High	Moderate	Moderate	Moderate	Moderate
Vitamin D plus calcium: Men and Women	1	RCT	Serious limitations†	Only 1 study	Direct	None	219	226	0.89 [0.74–1.07]	Moderate
		High	Moderate	Moderate	Moderate	Moderate
Vitamin D plus calcium: Women	2	RCT	No serious limitations	Consistent	Direct	High probability of reporting bias‡	720	1401	0.83 [0.73–0.95]	Moderate
		High	High	High	High	Moderate
Vitamin D plus calcium: Women Outcome: injurious Falls	2	RCT	No serious limitations	Consistent	Direct	High probability of reporting bias‡	1313	2667	0.77 [0.49–1.21]	Moderate
		High	High	High	High	Moderate
Hormone replacement therapy	1	RCT	Serious limitations§	Only 1 study	Direct	None	187	186	0.09 [0.80–1.20]	Moderate
		High	Moderate	Moderate	Moderate	Moderate
Medication withdrawal	1	RCT	No serious limitations	Only 1 study	Major uncertaintyabout directness§	Sparse data║ Strong evidence of association	24	24	0.34 [0.16–0.74]¶	Low
		High	High	High	Low	Low

^*RR refers to relative risk; CI, confidence interval; Interv, intervention; RCT, randomized controlled trial

^†No description of randomization or blinding (although stated “double-blinded RCT”) (74)

^‡In one study, use of vitamin D and calcium by self-report only over a period of 1 to 3 years, and falls outcome reported as interval recall (falls in past year). (121)

^§Study relied on long recall times (6 months) for falls outcome. (122)

^║Large amount of withdrawal (123-125)

^¶Hazard Ratio