Sellors 2003.

Methods	Randomised trial
Participants	889 elderly patients (intervention 431; control:458) 48 physicians (intervention 24; control 24) Ontario, Canada. Year of study: August 1999 to ˜ July 2000
Interventions	Structured medication assessment by pharmacist with patient, which assessed needs, drug‐related problems and course of action. This was discussed with the physician, who then indicate their recommendation intentions and plan. 5 months later physician‐pharmacist discussion of what recommendations have been implemented. 4 months later pharmacist phoned patient to discuss drug therapy.
Outcomes	SF‐36 (physical functioning) at 12 months
Notes	Funding source: Funding was provided by the Health Transition Fund, Health Canada, and in kind support from the Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, and the Centre for Evaluation of Medicines, St. Joseph’s Healthcare, Hamilton, Ont. Conflict of interest: Not stated
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	The pair of physicians in each postal code area were randomly allocated, in a concealed fashion, to the intervention or control group, using a central telephone randomisation procedure based on computer‐generated random numbers.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Randomisation was conducted by a research team member who was blinded to the practices’ identities.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All Outcomes/Outcome 1	High risk	Neither family physicians nor their patients were blinded to their allocation group.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All Outcomes/Outcome 1	High risk	Unblinded and self‐reported SF36
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Between group attrition < 10%. Overall completion rate > 80%.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All outcomes reported
Other bias	Low risk	None identified