Methods	RCT
Participants	Requiring terminal care: treatment = 186 (87% with a diagnosis of cancer); control = 43 (86% with a diagnosis of cancer)
	Living alone: treatment 21%, control 17%
	Mean age: treatment 72 (SD 11); control 73 (SD 14)
	Male 50%, female 54%
	Survival from referral for both groups a median of 11 days
Interventions	Referred from primary or secondary care
	6 qualified nurses, 2 nursing aides, a co-ordinator (RGN level), agency staff providing 24-hour care if required for a maximum of 2 weeks, most had Marie Curie experience. Intervention patients could also access standard care
	Control group received standard care: hospital care or hospice care, with input from the GP and district nurses, Marie Curie nursing, Macmillan nursing, social services and private nursing
Outcomes	Symptoms and support, GP visits, place of death and admission to hospital
Notes	UK study
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors’ judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	4:1 randomisation ratio (HAH:control) to ensure sufficient admissions to hospital at home. Random numbers from a random number table were used
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Allocation for each referral was assigned from a random number table by the researcher and concealed in sequentially numbered, opaque sealed envelopes
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias)	High risk
All outcomes
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)	Low risk	Response rates: 144/198 (73%) for carers, 225/228 (99%) district nurses, 194/228 (85%) primary care physicians
All outcomes
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All stated outcomes reported
Baseline measures	Low risk	Demographic data
Protection against contamination	High risk	Intervention was contaminated by other input available to the control group (e.g. supplemented by GP and other community care when less than 24-hour hospital at home input was provided)