Comparison 20. Sensitivity analysis 9: different exercise type coding.

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Rate of falls ‐ subgrouped by exercise type (OEP as multiple intervention)	48		Rate Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
1.1 Balance and functional exercises vs control	30	5556	Rate Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	0.75 [0.68, 0.82]
1.2 Multiple categories of exercise vs control	20	3738	Rate Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	0.72 [0.62, 0.83]
2 Number of fallers ‐ subgrouped by exercise type (OEP as multiple intervention)	52		Risk Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
2.1 Balance and functional exercises vs control	28	5946	Risk Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	0.86 [0.80, 0.92]
2.2 Multiple categories of exercise vs control	26	3965	Risk Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	0.83 [0.75, 0.92]
3 Rate of falls ‐ subgrouped by exercise type (any balance+strength as multiple intervention)	50		Rate Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
3.1 Balance and functional exercises vs control	16	2718	Rate Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	0.72 [0.62, 0.84]
3.2 Resistance exercise vs control	3	182	Rate Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	1.42 [0.71, 2.82]
3.3 Multiple categories of exercise vs control	35	6721	Rate Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	0.74 [0.67, 0.81]
4 Number of fallers ‐ subgrouped by exercise type (any balance+strength as multiple intervention)	53		Risk Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	Subtotals only
4.1 Balance and functional exercises vs control	13	2310	Risk Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	0.79 [0.65, 0.96]
4.2 Resistance exercise vs control	1	45	Risk Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	1.0 [0.46, 2.19]
4.3 Multiple categories of exercise vs control	41	7719	Risk Ratio (Random, 95% CI)	0.86 [0.81, 0.91]