Calfee 2003.

Methods	STUDY DESIGN: unintended consequences, case control Risk of Bias: HIGH
Participants	PROVIDERS: all physicians in adult medical and surgical units PARTICIPANTS: all patients in the units CLINICAL PROBLEM: use of targeted antibiotics (3rd‐generation cephalosporins, piperacillin/tazobactam, aztreonam, carbapenems, parenteral clindamycin, oral and parenteral vancomycin, parenteral fluoroquinolones and macrolides, and fluconazole) SETTING: 1 hospital in the USA
Interventions	FORMAT, Interventions: restrictive by review and make change, automatic stop order for prescriptions not meeting policy indications Intervention Functions: restriction DELIVERER: AMT COMPARISON: case control study DESIRED CHANGE: decrease excessive use of targeted drugs
Outcomes	UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES: proportion of nosocomial infections reported solely on the basis of a treating physician’s diagnosis during the endemic and epidemic periods (Table 1)
Notes	ROBINS‐I RISK OF BIAS CRITERIA: 1. Confounding: Low, confounding unlikely 2. Selection of participants into the study: Unclear, insufficient detail about selection of cases for the endemic and epidemic period 3. Measurement classification of interventions: Low, intervention status well defined, recorded at the time of intervention, and unaffected by knowledge of the outcome or risk of the outcome 4. Deviation from intended interventions: Low, no switches to other interventions or evidence of intervention failure 5. Missing data: Unclear, outcomes are reported as % with no numerator or denominator data 6. Measurement of outcome: High, outcome measure objective, but outcome assessors were aware of the intervention status, and the study does not report the actual number of cases 7. Selection of the reported result: High, reported effect selected from multiple measurements within the outcome domain FINANCIAL SUPPORT:Funding: no information. Competing Interests: no information ADDITIONAL DATA: no response from authors to request for additional data