Sensitivity analysis	Pooled impact of mobility strategies on mobility outcome (SMD, 95% CI)
In‐hospital trials
Primary analysis, all trials, random‐effects meta‐analysis	SMD 0.53, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.96; participants = 507; studies = 7; I2 = 81%
Sensitivity analysis 1, removing trials with unclear or high risk of bias on allocation concealment	SMD 0.58, 95% CI 0.05 to 1.10; participants = 415; studies = 6; I2 = 84%
Sensitivity analysis 2, removing trials with high risk of bias on any items	SMD 0.57, 95% CI ‐0.46 to 1.61; participants = 191; studies = 2; I2 = 87%
Sensitivity analysis 3, removing trials reported only in conference abstracts	No studies removed
Sensitivity analysis 4, removing trials that did not clearly focus on or predominantly include the target population of people with a fragility fracture resulting from low‐energy trauma	No studies removed
Sensitivity analysis 5, removing trials that included mixed populations	No studies removed
Sensitivity analysis 6, removing in‐hospital trials that measured outcomes at the end of the in‐hospital phase (the usual time point was that closest to four months).	SMD 0.39, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.78; participants = 327; studies = 4; I2 = 62%
Sensitivity analysis 7, all trials, fixed‐effects meta‐analysis	SMD 0.38, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.56; participants = 507; studies = 7; I2 = 81%
Post‐hospital trials
Primary analysis, all trials, random‐effects meta‐analysis	SMD 0.32, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.54; participants = 761; studies = 7; I2 = 48%
Sensitivity analysis 1, removing trials with unclear or high risk of bias on allocation concealment	SMD 0.22, 95% CI ‐0.01 to 0.46; participants = 486; studies = 5; I2 = 22%
Sensitivity analysis 2, removing trials with high risk of bias on any items	SMD 0.38, 95% CI ‐0.04 to 0.79; participants = 350; studies = 3; I2 = 70%
Sensitivity analysis 3, removing trials reported only in conference abstracts	No studies removed
Sensitivity analysis 4, removing trials that did not clearly focus on or predominantly include the target population of people with a fragility fracture resulting from low‐energy trauma	SMD 0.36, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.62; participants = 602; studies = 6; I2 = 53%
Sensitivity analysis 5, removing trials that included mixed populations	SMD 0.36, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.62; participants = 602; studies = 6; I2 = 53%
Sensitivity analysis 6, all trials, fixed‐effects meta‐analysis	SMD 0.33, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.50; participants = 602; studies = 6; I2 = 53%