Luukinen 2007.

Methods	Study design: RCT Number of study arms: 2 Length of follow‐up: 16 months
Participants	Setting: Oulu, Finland Number of participants: 486 Number analysed: 437 Number lost to follow‐up: 49 Sample: identified from population and geriatric registers of Oulu Age (years): mean 88 (SD 3) Sex: 79% female Inclusion criteria: age ≥ 85; home‐dwelling; ≥ 1 risk factor for falling (≥ 2 falls in previous year, loneliness, poor self‐rated health, poor visual acuity/hearing, depression, poor cognition, impaired balance, chair rise, slow walking speed, difficulty with at least 1 ADL, able to walk outdoors, up or down stairs) Exclusion criteria: none described
Interventions	1. Individual balance and gait training: Individual plan for home exercise (3 a day) or group exercise, walking exercises, self‐care exercises (duration and frequency not described). Interventions carried out by OT or physiotherapist or both 2. Control: asked to visit GP without written intervention form
Outcomes	1. Rate of falls 2. Number of people who experienced 1 or more falls (risk of falling)
Duration of the study	16 months median falls follow‐up
Adherence	Not reported
Notes	Source of funding: Ministry of Health and Social Affairs of Finland Economic information: not reported
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "Randomization was done by the study statistician using a random numbers table"
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Insufficient information to permit judgement
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Participants and personnel not blinded to allocated group but impact of non‐blinding unclear
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) Falls	Low risk	Ascertinment of falls was the same in each group and performed by blinded assessor Quote: "Fall recording was based on regular phone calls to all participants made every second month by a research nurse ... unaware of the randomization and the interventions."
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) Fractures	Unclear risk	Not applicable
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) Hospital admission, medical attention and adverse events	Unclear risk	Not applicable
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) Health related quality of life (self report)	Unclear risk	Not applicable
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Falls and fallers	High risk	More than 20% of fall data were missing (49%)
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	Minimum set of expected outcomes not reported (adverse events not reported)
Method of ascertaining falls (recall bias)	High risk	Interval recall Quote: "Fall recording was based on regular telephone interviews once in 2 months, but did not include diary reporting"