Doucette 2009.

Methods	Design: RT Groups: intervention (extended diabetes care); control (usual care)
Participants	Pharmacies: 7 Pharmacy workers: 9 pharmacists ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Pharmacy user: 78 people with type 2 diabetes Mean age: intervention 58.7 ± 13.3 years; control 61.2 ± 10.9 years % female: intervention 21%; control 22% Setting: unclear Country: USA
Interventions	Pharmacy worker‐directed intervention: participating pharmacists received training in diabetes management and study protocol. Both self‐study and live programs included discussion of mock cases. Skills training in monitoring blood pressure, using a blood glucose meter, filling an insulin syringe, and administering an insulin injection Delivered by: unclear Type: education materials, self‐management Mode of delivery: self‐study and live training TDF: knowledge, skills Duration: self‐study component was 15 hours, but length of live program was not stated. Follow‐up: not stated Pharmacy worker control: not applicable as control patients seen by other primary care providers ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Pharmacy user‐directed intervention: patients had already received 2 diabetes education sessions, then received extended diabetes care, discussed medications, clinical goals, and self‐care activities; pharmacists recommended medication changes to physicians when appropriate. Delivered by: pharmacists Type: self‐management; disease management Mode of delivery: individual face‐to‐face TDF: knowledge, goals Duration: intervention 12 months; number of interventions: up to 4 (quarterly) Follow‐up: 12 months (end of intervention) Pharmacy user control: usual diabetes care from their primary care provider
Outcomes	Pharmacy worker: not assessed ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐. Pharmacy user: Clinical: HA1c; LDL‐C; SBP; DBP; BMI Psychological health: not assessed Behavioural: The Summary of diabetes self care activities measure (SDSCA) Quality of life: not assessed Process: not assessed Costs: not assessed
Notes	Study/intervention name: none given Funding source: a grant from the Community Pharmacy Federation
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Unclear, no information provided on method of randomisation
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Unclear, not stated
Baseline outcome measures similar	Low risk	No differences
Baseline characteristics similar	Low risk	Minimal differences
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	No intention‐to‐treat analysis. Some patients did not present for final data collection, and 2 intervention patients did not meet pharmacist.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Not stated
Protection against contamination	Unclear risk	Recruitment at patient level, from same centre, unclear if patients attended different pharmacies
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Paper seemed to report all relevant outcomes.
Other bias	Unclear risk	Nothing noted
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Not blinded