Study	Reason for exclusion
Aaron 1996	No intervention‐ observational study
Abramson 1966	Summary paper, no data presented
Alberti 2001	Study design
Allen 1989	Intervention
Alvermann 1979	Descriptive article
Anderson 1982	Pediatric hospital
Anderson 2004	Intervention
Ansari 1969	Study design
Anthony Williams	Descriptive article
Armstrong 1984	Review article
Augustin 1996	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Azer 1971	Setting
Baird 1969	Outcomes
Baker 1987	No intervention
Baker 1992	No intervention
Baker 1993a	No intervention
Baker 1993b	Review article
Baldwin 1985	Not health‐related outcomes; policy changes
Bame 1993	Study design
Bame 1995	Study design
Bampton 1997	Validity of outcomes
Barker 2005	Descriptive article
Barlas 2001	Not health‐related outcome; query validity.
Beauchemin 1996	Retrospective study
Beauchemin 1998a	Duplicate of Beauchemin 1998b
Beauchemin 1998b	Retrospective study
Beck 1991	Intervention music therapy at home
Becker 1980	Outcome measure not validated
Beldon 2002	Other systematic review in this area (Cullum 2004)
Benedetti 2001	Retrospective study
Berg 2001	Participants (students)
Berlet 1979	No intervention
Bettschen‐Steiner	Overview‐ not a study
Biley 1994	Review article
Binek 2003	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Birdsong 1990	No intervention
Bodey 1969	Study design (no control)
Bodey 1971	Study design (matched pairs)
Boeke 1988	Validity of outcomes
Bonke 1982	Outcomes not reported for relevant groups; data collection methods unclear.
Bonny 1983	Could not obtain article‐ not assessed for inclusion
Bower 1995	Qualitative report
Bozcuk 2006	Study design
Breslow 1993	Descriptive article
Browning 2001	Intervention provided outside of hospital
Brunges 2003	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Buemi 1995	Study design; outcomes
Burke 1977	Participants
Burns 2000a	Study design
Burns 2000b	Study design
Burns 2002	Study design
Butler 1993	Setting
Byers 1997	Study design
Bykov 2003a	Setting and population
Bykov 2003b	Setting and population
Cai 2001a	Intervention
Cai 2001b	Intervention
Carpman 1983	Study design
Castellani 1968	Not a study
Ceccio 1984	Intervention excluded‐ relaxation technique
Chaudhury 2003	Cross‐sectional survey and qualitative interviews
Cheek 1971	Qualitative
Chikamori 2004	Intervention‐ interactive music therapy
Choctaw 1984	Policy confounding (sterile versus clean attire).
Chow 2005	Study design (computer modelling)
Christenfeld 1989	CBA‐ Control sites and 'before' sites not clearly defined
Cirina 1994	Review article
Clair 1994	Questionable validity of outcome, relevant data not presented
Clair 2006	Setting
Clark 1998	Setting
Connell 1996	Review article
Cook 1986	Review article
Cooper 1989	Qualitative
Cooper 1991	Qualitative
Cooper 1998	Included in Cochrane review by Cullum 2004
Coulson 1997	Setting
Counsell 2000	Policy confound
Courtright 1990	Outcome measure
Covinsky 1998	Policy confound
Cunningham 1997	Outcome measures
Davidson 1971	Study design
Davies 1980	Study design
Davis 1992	Setting
De Jong 1972	Participants
De l'Etoile 2002	Intervention
Dekker 1994	Confounding
Demling 1978	Patients‐ mix of adults and children. Data inseparable.
Denney 1997	Setting
Dennis 1988	Descriptive article
DeSchriver 1990	Setting not hospital
Devlin 1992	Study design
Dickinson 1995	Setting
Diffey 1988	Study design
Dolce 1985	Retrospective study
Donchin 2002	Review article
Dracup 1988	Review article
Dritsas 2004	Intervention not well‐defined
Dubbs 2003	Not a research study
Dubois 1995	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Duckworth 1988	Policy changes
Durham 1986	Intervention provided during education programme
Dzhuraeva 1989	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Egger 1981	Study design
Eisenman 1995	Study design
Elmståhl 1997	Not hospital setting
Escher 1993	Music therapist confound; group differences in timing of data collection
Evans 1994	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Falk 1973	No intervention
Fauerbach 2002	Intervention entailed coaching patients
Ferguson 1997	Setting not hospital
Finkelstein 1971	Intervention interactive
Finlay 1993	Qualitative
Fox 1986	Study design
Frandsen 1990	Editorial
Frank 1985	Study design
Fratianne 2001	Intervention interactive music therapy
Freeman 1987	Study design
Freireich 1975	Preliminary report of Rodriguez 1978; policy confound
Friberg 1999	Sham operations
Friberg 2003	One patient health‐related outcome reported (surgical site infections), but not enough detail on how it was assessed or if it was noted on an 'ad hoc' basis.
Frid 1981	Interventions not suitable for inclusion
Friedman 1992	Study design
Gabor 2003	No intervention in patients
Gaffney 1986	Setting; study design
Gast 1989	Study design
Girard 2004	Editorial
Good 1978	Qualitative
Good 1995	Intervention group provided 20 mins coaching
Good 1998	Intervention group provided reinforncement and training‐ bias
Good 1999	Intervention group provided coaching on relaxing
Good 2001	Secondary analysis of Good 1999
Good 2002	Secondary analysis of previous study.
Good 2005	Duplicate study‐ secondary analysis of Good 1999.
Gray 2000	Duplicate of study included in Cochrane review by Cullum 2004
Green 1994	News article
Greenberg 1992	Descriptive report
Grindley 1996	Other systematic review in this area (Cullum 2004)
Grumet 1994	Discussion article
Guillemin 2000	Qualitative
Gulledge 1981	Not research
Gundermann 1974	Outcomes
Gurr 1997	Descriptive case study
Guzzetta 1989	Relaxation (psychological) technique used in music group
Guétin 2005	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Götell 2002	Qualitative, setting
Götell 2003	Qualitative
Haddock 1994	Study design
Hagerman 2005	Study design
Hahn 1995	Study design
Hamel 2001	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Hanger 1999	Study design
Harmankaya 2002	Study design
Harris 1992	Outcomes
Harrison 1989	Study design
Harvey 1998	Review article
Harwood 1992	Study design
Hashiguchi 2005	Study design
Haslam 1970	Study design
Haun 2001	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Haythornthwaite 2001	Intervention‐ taught techniques
Heiser 1997	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Helmes 2006	Outcomes
Hendrich 2004	Study design
Herr 2003	Study design and outcomes
Hewawasam 1996	Study design
Hilton 1976	Study design
Hilton 1985	No intervention
Hinojosa 1995	Not a study
Hoffman 2000	Intervention interactive virtual reality
Hoffman 2001	Intervention excluded‐ interactive distraction
Holahan 1972	Experimental environment (not clinical situation), policy change
Holahan 1973	Outcomes
Holahan 1976	Outcomes
Holden 1992	Intervention‐ patient education video
Homicki 2004	Descriptive article
Hooper 1992	Case study
Hsu 1998	Intervention not well defined
Hudson 1995	Study design
Hudson 1996	Outcomes
Huffman 1994	Intervention not well defined
Hussian 1987	Study design
Hyde 1989	Qualitative; setting
Ingham 1997	Setting
Itai 2000	Study design
Ittelson 1970	Study design
Jacobs 1974	Participants
Janelli 1997	Policy confound (restraints use)
Janelli 1998	Policy confound (restraints use)
Janelli 2000	Policy confound (restraints use)
Janelli 2002	Outcome measure
Janelli 2004	Outcome measure
Janiszewski 1980	Study design
Janssen 2000	Outcome measure
Janssen 2001	Participants
Jarvis 1979	Conference abstract‐ not enough information
Jastremski 1998	Literature review
Jonas 1988	Study design
Kaempf 1989	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Kaiming 1997	Inadequate description of intervention
Kaldenberg 1999	Study design
Kam 1994	Review article
Kane 2004	Data unsuitable for cross‐over study
Karro 2005	Design; Outcomes
Kartman 1984	Descriptive article
Keep 1980	Study design
Kibbler 1998	Study design; confounding
Kim 1997	Not health‐related outcome
Kim 2005	Setting not hospital
Kimata 2003	Setting
Kirkpatrick 1998	Commentary
Knobel 1985	Descriptive article
Kolanowski 1990	Setting
Kopp 1991	Intervention not well defined
Kovach 1997	Setting
Kulik 1996	Intervention
Kumar 1992	Validity of outcomes
Kwon 2006	Study design‐ selection of participants by matching, different wards assigned to different conditions.
Lai 1999	Unable to clarify discrepancies in data with author
Lai 2001	Study design
Lai 2005	Setting
Lai 2006	Setting; Duplicate
Laitinen 1994	Intervention
Lamont 1975	No intervention
Lan‐Ping 2000	Policy confound
Larsson 1991	Study design
Laurion 2003	Intervention began before admission
Lawson 2000	Study design (same study as Lawson 2003)
Lawson 2002	Study design (same study as Lawson 2003)
Lawson 2003	Study design (before‐and‐after no contemporaneous control)
Lawton 1970	Study design
Lazaroff 2000	Unclear methods and data
Leather 2003	Study design
Lee 2004b	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Legg 1970	Not patient outcomes; test scenario
Lehrner 2000	Setting
Leigh 1972	Study design
Levin 1987	Intervention relaxation training
Levine 1973	Policy confounding
Lewis 1999	Study 1: inappropriate control; Study 2: intervention
Leão 2004	Study design
Lidwell 1966	Study design
Lidwell 1969	Test scenario, not patient outcomes
Lidwell 1975	Study design
Lidwell 1982	Some relevant subgroups within study however cannot separate data (number of re‐operations in each subgroup). Additionally, there are discrepancies in reporting with Lidwell 1984 with 185 patients switching subgroups.
Lidwell 1984	Same study as Lidwell 1982. Non‐transparant reporting of findings‐ data not usable. Discrepancies between Lidwell 1982 and Lidwell 1984.
Liebowitz 1979	Study design
Litch 2006	Narrative article
Locsin 1979	Intervention not well described (CCT)
Locsin 1981	Intervention not well described (CCT)
Locsin 1988	Could not obtain article, not assessed for inclusion
Lomas 1987	Outcomes
Louis 2002	Setting
Lowbury 1971	Population‐ age
Lowbury 1978	Preliminary report of Lidwell 1982/Lidwell 1984
Martin 1998	Policy confound
Martin 1999	Inadequate information provided (Ulrich study)
May 1984	Study design
Mayer 1991	Study design‐ inappropriate data
McCaffrey 2004	Outcomes not validated/reliable
McConnell 2005	Study design; Intervention unclear
McGonagle 2002	Study design
McKendrick 1976	Study design
McLaughlin 1976	Qualitative study
McNaughton 2005	Study design
Mellgren 1967	Study design
Mellor 2001	Commentary
Metera 1975a	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Metera 1975b	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Meyer 1994	No intervention
Middelboe 2001	Confounding
Mihara 2005	Lack of information
Miller 1998	Participants; study design
Miluk‐Kolasa 1994	Confounding
Miluk‐Kolasa 1996	Intervention not well described
Miluk‐Kolasa 2002	Intervention not well described
Mok 2003	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Moore 1998	Policy change
Morgan 1998	Setting
Morris 1970	Study design
Morsley 1999	Commentary
Moss 1987	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Moss 1988	Intervention not well described, no data presented (CCT)
Mulin 1997	Study design
Murrock 2002	Setting and outcomes
Namazi 1989	Study design
Nauseef 1981	Policy changes (confounding)
Nelson Negley 1990	Setting; outcomes
Nixon 2006	Other systematic review in this area (Cullum 2004)
Norberg 1986	Study design
Noskin 2001	Literature review
Notelovitz 1978	Study design
Oberle 1990	Study design
Okada 1986	Not health‐related outcomes
Okamoto 2002	Study design
Olsen 1984	Outcomes; unclear study design
Oyama 2000	Intervention interactive with patient
Palmer 1998	Policy confound
Palmer 1999	Outcomes data not provided
Parker 1965	Patients‐ 38% <10 years old
Passini 1998	No intervention; comparison with healthy controls
Passweg 1998	Study design
Pattison 1996	Confounding staffing differences
Petersen 1987	Policy (decontamination) changes
Peterson 1977	Outcomes (validity and relevance)
Pimentel‐Souza 1996	Study design (cross‐sectional, no intervention/control)
Plourde 1997	Intervention
Prensner 2001	Study design
Preston 1981	Study design (not enough data points to be included as ITS)
Pring 1998	Other systematic review in this area (Cullum 2004)
Pruyn 1998	Validity of outcomes
Qian 2006	Mock setting
Rabin 1981	Descriptive article
Ragneskog 1996	Setting and outcomes
Rakshy 1997	Inappropriate methods and analysis
Redd 1994	Aromas administered via nasal cannula, judged to be too invasive to constitute an 'environmental' intervention.
Ribas‐Mundo 1981	Intervention (non‐environmental changes)
Rice 1980	Outcomes
Rodriguez 1978	Policy confounding
Rosenthal 1985	Intervention
Routhieaux 1997	Not patient outcomes
Rubin 1998	Literature review
Rudy 1995	Intervention (care delivery systems)
Salmore 2000	Intervention‐ relaxation tape
Satlin 1992	Intervention
Satoh 1983	Intervention not well described
Schimpff 1975	Policy confounding
Schneider 2003	Intervention excluded as interactive
Schneider 2004	Intervention excluded as interactive
Schofield 2000	Intervention
Schott 1999	Policy change
Schuhl 1985	Data collection tool not validated
Schuster 1985	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Sheperd 2001	Study design
Sherertz 1985	Intervention
Sherertz 1987	Study design
Sherratt 2004	Outcomes not validated
Shertzer 2001	Policy change‐ staff asked to remain quiet on intervention days
Shirani 1986	Study design
Shooter 1963	Policy change
Sidorenko 2000a	Intervention as treatment
Sidorenko 2000b	Compilation of studies, insufficient detail presented
Siedliecki 2006	Setting
Siegman‐Igra 1986	Study design (no control)
Silini 2002	Study design
Singer 2000	Population, < 90% over 18 years old.
Skoutelis 1993	Study design
Smith 1974	Follow‐up to Smylie 1971 and Davidson 1971; study design
Smylie 1971	Study design
Sommer 1958	Study design
Spintge 2000	Overview‐ insufficient detail
Spitzer 2005	Music not well described; cross‐over trial with and without vibration.
Stahler 1984	Study design (gender differences)
Standley 1992	Setting not hospital
Staricoff 2001	Study design
Staricoff 2003a	Study design (block periods)
Staricoff 2003b	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Staricoff 2003c	Study design
Staricoff 2003d	Study design
Staricoff 2003e	Study design
Steelman 1990	Intervention not well defined
Steer 1975	Confounding
Steffes 1985	Staffing confound
Steingold 1963	Study design
Stermer 1998	Outcomes not validated
Stone 1989	Study design
Strauser 1997	Setting not hospital
Swan 2003	Study design
Swinford 1987	Intervention psychogical
Szeto 1999	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Sármány 2006	Patients allocated retrospectively to music or control, depending on whether or not they had noticed/heard any music.
Tanabe 2001	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Tang 1997	Intervention not well described
Tate 1997	Intervention; outcome not validated
Thompson 2002	Study design
Thorgaard 2004	Outcomes not validated
Thorgaard 2005	Study design
Thorne 1963	Qualitative evaluation
Tideiksaar 1993	Intervention
Tierney 1978	Study design; outcomes
Tse 2003	Setting not in hospital
Tse 2005	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Tyerman 1980	Description of intervention/control unclear
Uedo 2004	Insufficient info (intervention and data)
Ulrich 1984	Study design‐ retrospective matched pairs
Ulrich 1993b	Conference abstract‐ unable to obtain further details from author
Ulrich 2003	Setting not a hospital
Updike 1987	Study design
Updike 1990	Study design
Van Someren 1997	Setting; Study design
Veitch 2001	Literature review
Verderber 1983	Study design, validity of outcomes
Vietri 2004	Study design
Vollert 2002	Test not clinical situation, healthy controls.
Vollert 2003	Setting not a hospital
Walker 1989	Qualitative interviews
Walsh 1989	Policy changes
Walther‐Larsen 1988	Intervention not well defined, query outcomes validity
Watanabe 1997	Not health‐related outcomes; conversation confounding
Weber 1996	Overview article
Weisman 1981	Setting
Whitehead 1984	Study design
Whyte 1968	Not patient outcomes
Wikström 1992	Setting not a hospital
Wikström 1993	Setting not a hospital
Wilkins 1988	Study design
Williams 1962	Study design; policy changes
Williams 1969	Study design‐ no control
Williamson 1992	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Wilson 1972	Study design‐ retrospective
Wilson 1983	Qualitative; participants
Winkel 1986	Descriptive case studies
Wint 2002	Participants not adults
Wolowicka 1989	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Wood 1977	validity of outcomes
Wright 1993	Participants not patients
Wyon 1968	Staff outcomes
Yamanaka 2003	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Yates 1973	Policy confounding
Yilmaz 2003	Inappropriate control‐ drugs
Yinnon 1992	Study design
Yung 2002	Music CCT ‐ Post‐hoc exclusion
Zhong 2005	Duplicate study (Lee 2005)