8. Quality of evidence ‐ GRADE assessment: AE intervention versus another AE intervention.

Quality assessment							Number of participants		Quality	Importance
Number of studies	Study design	Risk of bias	Inconsistency	Indirectness	Imprecision	Other considerations	AE intervention	AE control
HRQL, 0‐100, lower is best
2	Randomized trial	Seriousa	Not serious	Not serious	Seriousb	Studies not pooled	79	83	⊕⊕⊝⊝ low	CRITICAL
Pain intensity, 0‐100, lower is best
3	Randomized trial	Seriousb	Not serious	Not serious	Seriousc	Studies not pooled	117	121	⊕⊕⊝⊝ low	CRITICAL
Fatigue, 0‐100, lower is best
2	Randomized trial	Seriousa	Not serious	Not serious	Seriousb	Studies not pooled	79	83	⊕⊕⊝⊝ low	IMPORTANT
Stiffness, 0‐100, lower is best
1	Randomized trial	Seriousa	Not serious	Not serious	Seriousb	One study	51	56	⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low	IMPORTANT
Physical function, 0‐100, lower is best
2	Randomized trial	Seriousa	Seriousd	Not serious	Seriousb		80	84	⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low	IMPORTANT
All‐cause withdrawals
2	Randomized trial	Seriousa	Not serious	Not serious	Seriousb		20/85 (23.5%)	25/89 (28.1%)	⊕⊕⊝⊝ low	IMPORTANT
Adverse events: not reported

^aIssues of detection and performance bias

^bIssues related to selection, detection, performance, and other risk of bias

^cWide confidence intervals, number of participants less than 400 rule of thumb

^dInterventions not similar across studies

AE: aerobic exercise; HRQL: health‐related quality of life