Lenaghan 2007.

Study characteristics
Methods	RT 6 months
Participants	136 participants registered with 1 general practice (1 participant from each group withdrew shortly after randomisation) Home‐based > 80 years, living at home, taking ≥ 4 oral medications, and had ≥ 1 additional medicine‐related risk factor Participants were excluded if they were resident in a care home or if there was documented use of an adherence aid. Age: intervention 84.5 years, control 84.1 years (no SD supplied) Gender female: intervention 46 (67.6%), control 42 (63.6%) Country: UK Sociodemographics: living alone: intervention 44 (64.7%), control 43 (65.1%); social class (I, II, III): intervention 33 (48.5%), control 29 (43.9%); 9% of practice were aged over 80 years (twice the national average) Ethnicity: 98.5% of the local town population were white, compared to 90.9% for England
Interventions	Comparing home‐based medication review with standard care The intervention: the pharmacist was asked to identify cases where adverse drug reactions or drug interactions may be occurring. This was noted using a tick box on the medication review form after detailed information had been gained from the participant regarding all over‐the‐counter and prescribed drugs The control group received standard care
Outcomes	Non‐elective hospital admissions during the 6‐month follow‐up period Deaths Admission to care homes Number of drug items prescribed Self‐assessed QoL
Notes
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No indication of random sequencing
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Randomisation was carried out by a third party and was stratified by whether the participant lived alone.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	It is unclear if participants were blinded to the intervention.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Attrition reported and reasons for attrition presented
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Outcome data on hospital admissions were provided by hospital episode statistics (not self‐report) and are therefore unlikely to be biased.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Outcome data on hospital admissions were provided by hospital episode statistics (not self‐report) and are therefore unlikely to be biased.
Protection against contamination bias	Unclear risk	Unclear
Other bias	High risk	Research was carried out in 1 rural general practice with a single experienced review pharmacist, which has a bearing on the generalisability of the results.