Intensive glycaemic control vs conventional glucose control: Progression of nephropathy
It is very uncertain whether intensive glucose control changes progression of nephropathy compared with conventional glucose control (very low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Intensive glucose control vs conventional glucose control Progression of nephropathy · persons with type 1 diabetes mellitus It is very uncertain whether intensive glucose control changes progression of nephropathy compared with conventional glucose control (very low certainty). Intensive glucose control versus conventional glucose control for type 1 diabetes mellitus (2014) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.79 | 3 studies · 179 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intensive glucose control versus conventional glucose control for type 1 diabetes mellitus 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.