Moorcroft 2004.

Methods	Design: single‐centre, parallel RCT; 1‐year duration. Inclusion criteria: participants with CF who were willing to participate were recruited from a population of 150 attending the adult CF centre in Manchester at the time of the study. All participants had documented CF on the basis of clinical history plus either an increased sweat chloride or abnormal genetic testing. Exclusion criteria: participation in another clinical trial; pregnancy; transplant listing, or clinical cor pulmonale.
Participants	51 participants with CF were randomised; 42 completed the study. Group demographics Exercise group (n = 30): mean (SD) age 23.5 (6.4) years. Control group (n = 18): 23.6 (5.5) years. 3 participants dropped out at the start of programme: 1 from training group due to failure to attend on initial assessment; and 2 in the control group were withdrawn due to ill health. A further 6 participants dropped out during the 1‐year period.
Interventions	Long‐term aerobic and anaerobic study over 1 year. Group 1: unsupervised exercise (based on individual preferences general aerobic exercises for lower body and weight training for upper body) 3 times per week. Group 2: control (continue with usual activities).
Outcomes	Included in this study were: FEV1; FVC; whole blood lactate; RER; heart rate; Borg breathlessness and muscle effort; VE, RR peak for arm and bicycle ergometry at 55% maximal workload; BMI and weight.
Notes	This study is a full text article of Dodd 1998 and Moorcroft 2000 abstracts.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Randomised to either active or control groups in a ratio of 3:2. A stratified randomisation in blocks (block size not stated) was used to balance the groups for FEV1, sputum colonisation by Burkholderia cepacia and gender. No details of method reported.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not discussed.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Not possible to blind participants to intervention. Unclear whether personnel was blinded.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Unclear whether outcome assessors blinded.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	3 participants dropped out at the start of programme: 1 from training group due to failure to attend on initial assessment; and 2 in the control group were withdrawn due to ill health. A further 6 participants dropped out during the 1‐year period. Reasons for dropout were not clearly reported. After 1 year, overall dropout rate was 18% and balanced among the groups (19% in the intervention and 15% in the control group). Intentition‐to‐treat analysis was not performed. Missing data were treated by omission and only data for those who completed study presented.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All outcome detailed in methods were reported in results. Data reported for all time points.
Other bias	Low risk	Clearly stated inclusion and exclusion criteria and described method of statistical analysis used.