Gerding 1985.

Methods	STUDY DESIGN: ITS Risk of Bias: HIGH
Participants	PROVIDERS: all prescribers in the hospital PARTICIPANTS: all patients in the hospital CLINICAL PROBLEM: requiring aminoglycoside treatment SETTING: 1 Veterans Administration hospital in the USA. UBA data about resistance from 14 other similar hospitals
Interventions	FORMAT: no valid prescribing data. Restrictive. DELIVERER: specialist physician COMPARISON: usual care DESIRED CHANGE: decrease excessive
Outcomes	MICROBIAL: resistance to gentamicin and aminoglycoside use
Notes	FINANCIAL SUPPORT: Funding: commercial, Bristol Laboratories and the Veterans Administration. Competing Interests: no information ADDITIONAL DATA: no response from authors to request for additional data Microbial Risk of Bias: MEDIUM, case definition Low, planned intervention Low, other infection control Unclear, no information
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Intervention independent (ITS) ?	Unclear risk	Only 4 months' pre‐intervention data, so secular/seasonal changes possible. No information about infection control measures.
Analysed appropriately (ITS) ?	Low risk	Re‐analysed
Shape of effect pre‐specified (ITS) ?	Low risk	Point of analyses was point of intervention.
Unlikely to affect data collection (ITS) ?	Low risk	Routine data
Knowledge of the allocation adequately prevented(ITS)?	Low risk	Routine data
Incomplete outcome data addressed (ITS) ?	Low risk	Routine data
Free of selected reporting (ITS) ?	Low risk	Routine data
Free of other bias (ITS) ?	Unclear risk	NOT CLEARMicrobial Outcome Risk of Bias: Planned intervention: DONE Implementation in response to emergence of gentamicin resistance over the previous 5 years; Case definition: DONE Infection from clinical isolates; Other infection control measures: NOT CLEAR, no information provided.