Thaut 2019.

Study characteristics
Methods	RCT
Participants	Setting: home, USA N = 60 Sample: study participants were randomly selected from referral lists of local Parkinson's disease support groups and neurology practices (62% women) Age (years): Mean (SD) intervention group 71 (7), control group 73 (8) Inclusion criteria: diagnosis of idiopathic PD; HY stage 3 or 4; at least two falls in the past year; a stable antiparkinson medication regime; able to walk independently at least 50 metres. Exclusion criteria: other neurological or orthopaedic conditions; medically diagnosed hearing loss; dementia (Mini‐mental State Examination score of < 24) Disease severity at baseline: HY stage mean 3.5 (SD not reported)
Interventions	Exercise 1. Exercise: walking in a home‐based environment with rhythmic auditory stimulation via click‐embedded music. Individual, level of supervision unclear (30 minutes, 7x/week for 24 weeks) 2. Exercise: walking in a home‐based environment with rhythmic auditory stimulation via click‐embedded music. Individual, level of supervision unclear (30 minutes, 7x/week for 16 weeks; 8 weeks intervention, 8 weeks no intervention, 8 weeks intervention) All participants received standard care and optimal medical treatment during the study
Outcomes	1. Number of fallers
Duration of the study	24 weeks
Funding source	The Charlene B. Flood Memorial Fund, San Diego California
Notes	Fall data collected: during the 24 week intervention period, details of ascertainment not reported.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	A random component in the sequence generation was described. Quote: "Subjects were randomly selected and assigned in an intent‐to‐treat design to the experimental and control conditions using a computerized random selector program."
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Allocation concealment was described as by central allocation. Quote: "Subjects were randomly selected and assigned in an intent‐to‐treat design to the experimental and control conditions using a computerized random selector program implemented by a computer specialist external to the study to assure allocation concealment."
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Participants and intervention (exercise) delivery personnel not blinded to group allocation but impact of non‐blinding unclear.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) Falls and fallers	Unclear risk	Unclear if personnel collecting fall information blinded to group allocation. Quote: "The Fall Index was computed based on self‐reports by subjects or caregivers”
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Falls	Unclear risk	Data not available to assess.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) Fallers	Unclear risk	Data not available to assess.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	The study protocol is available (NCT03316365) and all of the study’s pre‐specified (primary and secondary) outcomes that are of interest in the review have been reported in the pre‐specified way.
Method of ascertaining falls (recall bias) Falls and fallers	Unclear risk	Details of ascertainment are not described.