Intensive glycaemic control vs conventional glucose control: All‐cause mortality
- Population
- patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus
- Intervention
- Intensive glycaemic control
- Comparison
- conventional glucose control
- Outcome
- All‐cause mortality
Reviews word the same question differently. Two decision models (TypeSafe's Jev and Liquid AI's d1) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others, and rows count as this question only when both agree on all four. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each row.
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
How each review answered it
Include earlier review versions| Question | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Intensive glycaemic control vs standard glycaemic control Mortality · patients with Type 2 diabetes Effect of the treatment of Type 2 diabetes mellitus on the development of cognitive impairment and dementia (2017) · Cochrane | RR 1 [0.79, 1.26] | 3 studies · 15888 participants | Moderate |
Intensive glycaemic control vs conventional glycaemic control All‐cause mortality · participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus Targeting intensive glycaemic control versus targeting conventional glycaemic control for type 2 diabetes… (2013) · Cochrane | RR 1 [0.92, 1.08] | 24 studies · 34325 participants | Moderate |
Trials and studies behind the answers
The primary studies that full-text reviews tie to these outcomes. Reviews from the Summary of Findings tier list no included studies here, and trials have not yet been matched to questions on their own, so this list is incomplete.