Geisser 2005.

Study characteristics
Methods	Study design: RCT Setting: USA, healthcare Exercise groups: 4 Comparison groups: 0
Participants	Number of participants: 100 (E1 = 26, E2 = 25, E3 = 24, E4 = 25) Chronic LBP duration: 63 months (long) Neurological/radicular symptoms: Some participants Mean age (years): 40 Sex (female): 66%
Interventions	Exercise Group 1 (E1): Sahrmann & Bookhour exercises (stretches, strengthening, self‐corrections) to address specific dysfunction (i.e. innominate self‐correction, unilateral prone press‐ups); type = Pilates & stretching; duration = 5 weeks; dose = low; design = individualised; delivery = individual; additional intervention = manual therapy Exercise Group 2 (E2): Sahrmann & Bookhour exercises (stretches, strengthening, self‐corrections) to address specific dysfunction (i.e. innominate self‐correction, unilateral prone press‐ups); type = Pilates & stretching; duration = 5 weeks; dose = low; design = individualised; delivery = individual; additional intervention = placebo Exercise Group 3 (E3): General stretches (hamstring, knee to chest, quads, and prone on elbows), aerobic exercise (walking at fast pace for 20 minutes); type = stretching & aerobic; duration = 5 weeks; dose = low; design = individualised; delivery = individual; additional intervention = manual therapy Exercise Group 4 (E4): General stretches (hamstring, knee to chest, quads, and prone on elbows), aerobic exercise (walking at fast pace for 20 minutes); type = stretching & aerobic; duration = 5 weeks; dose = low; design = individualised; delivery = individual; additional intervention = placebo
Outcomes	Core outcomes reported: Pain (Visual Analogue Scale); function (Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale) Follow‐up time periods available for syntheses: 5 weeks (short)
Notes	Conflicts of interest: Not reported Funding source: National Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research (R03‐HD35893); National Institute of Child and Human Development; National Institutes of Health Other: Information modified for author contact
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Author contact: 100 allocated to each grp, assigned to group based on order of entry
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	High risk	Not described
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Low risk	The treating therapist was not blind to the treatment group of the patient, but attempted to keep patients blind to their group assignment.
Blinding of care provider (performance bias)	High risk	The treating therapist was not blind to the treatment group of the patient, but attempted to keep patients blind to their group assignment.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	The self‐report measures were re‐administered following the last visit with the therapist by the principal investigator, who was blinded to the treatment.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Out of the 100 patients recruited, 72 patients completed the study.
Participants analysed in group allocated (attrition bias)	High risk	Only patients who completed treatment were used.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Support for judgement was not available.
Groups similar at baseline (selection bias)	Low risk	Chi‐square tests and analyses of variance (ANOVA) were used to compare the groups in terms of dropouts, age, gender, compensation status, surgical history.
Co‐interventions avoided or similar (performance bias)	Low risk	Patients were allowed to continue their use of pain medications, but were asked to not change their usage during the course of the study.
Compliance acceptable in all groups (performance bias)	High risk	Examination of compliance with exercise revealed that six patients who completed the study were unable to reproduce one or more of their exercises.
Timing of outcome assessment similar in all groups (detection bias)	Low risk	Author contact: most were measured at five weeks.