Ritchie 2000.

Methods	DETAILS OF STUDY AIM OF INTERVENTION: to improve patient attendance at outpatients clinic after ED visit. AIM OF STUDY: to determine whether the intervention of a telephone call within 3 days of ED attendance would improve the proportion of patients making recommended appointments and the proportion of patients attending scheduled appointments. STUDY DESIGN: RCT. METHODS OF RECRUITMENT OF PARTICIPANTS: consecutive patients who were advised by ED doctors to make outpatient appointments were identified for inclusion using the ED computer system over a 4 week period. INCLUSION CRITERIA FOR PARTICIPATION IN STUDY: EXCLUSION CRITERIA FOR PARTICIPATION IN STUDY: do not speak english/ confused or demented with no carer/ had no telephone/ age under 16 years/haven been included previously in the study/ are referred to a private specialist or another hospital. INFORMED CONSENT OBTAINED? no. ETHICAL APPROVAL? yes. FUNDING: unclear. ASSESSMENT OF STUDY QUALITY ALLOCATION CONCEALMENT: inadequate. EPOC‐ QUALITY CRITERIA 2002: B. moderate risk of bias. METHOD OF GENERATING RANDOMISATION SCHEDULE: restricted randomisation in blocks of ten was performed using a table of random numbers from a standard statistical text. METHOD OF CONCEALMENT OF ALLOCATION: not specified. BLINDING: ·PARTICIPANTS: no. ·PROVIDER/S: no. ·OUTCOME ASSESSOR/S: no. INTENTION TO TREAT ANALYSIS: yes. BASELINE COMPARABILITY OF INTERVENTION AND CONTROL GROUPS: yes. STATISTICAL METHODS AND THEIR APPROPRIATENESS: chi‐square/ logistic regression. CONSUMER INVOLVEMENT: not stated.
Participants	DESCRIPTION: ED patients. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION: Australia. SETTING: discharged home from an acute care setting. NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS: ELIGIBLE: 400. RANDOMISED TO INTERVENTION: 200. RANDOMISED TO CONTROL: 180. INCLUDED IN ANALYSIS INTERVENTION GROUP: 164. INCLUDED IN ANALYSIS CONTROL GROUP: 180. AGE: RANGE OR MEAN (SD): 16‐65+ . GENDER (% MALE): 64. ETHNICITY: not stated. PRINCIPAL HEALTH PROBLEM OR DIAGNOSIS: various. OTHER HEALTH PROBLEM/S: TREATMENT RECEIVED/RECEIVING: unclear. OTHER SOCIAL/DEMOGRAPHIC DETAILS:
Interventions	DETAILS OF INTERVENTION: patients in the intervention group were phoned by one of the authors (MD) or a research nurse 1‐3 days after ED attendance. A general enquiry was made about their health and the importance of medical follow‐up was explained in general terms; if the patient had already made an appointment, they were reminded about that appointment; for those who had not yet scheduled an appointment, they were reminded that they had been advised to do so, and an offer was made to book one for them at that time. DETAILS OF CONTROL: usual care. CO‐INTERVENTION? no. DETAILS OF CO‐INTERVENTIONS: DELIVERY OF INTERVENTION Frequency: 1. First time at day 1‐3 after discharge. Period: PROVIDERS: doctor/nurse. INTERVENTION QUALITY: unclear, FIDELITY/INTEGRITY: unclear.
Outcomes	NUMBER OF OUTCOMES: 1. OUTCOME / TOOL / TOOL VALIDATED / METHOD OF ASSESSMENT / TIME OF ASSESSMENT A.Psycho‐social health of patients (uncertainty, anxiety, informational needs, mood, coping, quality of life, social activity, ..): B.Physical health of patients (eg. functional status, self‐care, self‐efficacy, independence, ..): C.Other consumer oriented outcomes (eg. treatment adherence, knowledge, adverse events, ..): Compliance / self‐developed / no / hospital record / within 3 months. D. Health service delivery oriented outcomes (eg. hospital readmission, health services utilization, ..):
Notes	·CHANGES IN TRIAL PROTOCOL ·CONTACT WITH AUTHOR ·POWER CALCULATION? yes. ·RECORD IF THE STUDY WAS TRANSLATED FROM A LANGUAGE OTHER THAN ENGLISH. ·RECORD IF THE STUDY WAS A DUPLICATE PUBLICATION.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Allocation concealment?	High risk	C ‐ Inadequate