Dormuth 2006.

Methods	RMS
Participants	Canada, British Columbia (BC) PharmaCare Programme
Interventions	Ceiling + Fixed Ceiling + Co‐insurance
Outcomes	Medicine use
Notes	Same study as Dormuth 2008, Dormuth 2009 and Wang 2008b 1 of the co‐authors received research grants from Pfizer, Inc. The other study authors report no competing interests
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not applicable (RMS)
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not applicable (RMS)
Baseline outcome measurement similarity	Unclear risk	Not applicable (RMS)
Baseline characteristics similarity	Unclear risk	Not applicable (RMS)
Protection against contamination	Unclear risk	Not applicable (RMS)
Intervention independent of other changes	High risk	Long period (1997‐2004): Although some factors were controlled (new medicines in the market and changes in guideline), other aspects such as number of medical care appointments or total potential medical appointment offers may have influenced outcomes measured
Shape of the intervention effect pre‐specified	Low risk	Point analysis is the point of intervention
Intervention unlikely to affect data collection	Low risk	Sources and methods were the same before and after the intervention
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	No outcome data are missing
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Outcomes are objective
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All relevant outcomes in the Methods section are reported in the Results section
Other bias	Low risk	No other important bias is detected in the study