What do systematic reviews say?

Summary of findings: insulin detemir vs NPH insulin

• (Ultra‐)long‐acting insulin analogues for people with type 1 diabetes mellitus 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  4.97 [0.79, 31.38]
  9 studies · 3334 participants
  Moderate
• (Ultra‐)long‐acting insulin analogues versus NPH insulin (human isophane insulin) for adults with type 2 diabetes… 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  Peto OR 0.74 [0.2, 2.65]
  8 studies · 2328 participants
  Low

Insulin glargine vs NPH insulin

• (Ultra‐)long‐acting insulin analogues for people with type 1 diabetes mellitus 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  0.14 [0, 6.98]
  8 studies · 2175 participants
  Moderate
• (Ultra‐)long‐acting insulin analogues versus NPH insulin (human isophane insulin) for adults with type 2 diabetes… 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  Peto OR 1.06 [0.62, 1.82]
  14 studies · 6173 participants
  Low

Short‐acting insulin analogues vs regular human insulin

Short‐acting insulin analogues showed no clear difference in all‐cause mortality (N) compared with regular human insulin (moderate certainty).

• Short‐acting insulin analogues versus regular human insulin for adult, non‐pregnant persons with type 2 diabetes… 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  Peto OR 1.66 [0.41, 6.64]
  6 studies · 2519 participants
  Moderate
• Short‐acting insulin analogues versus regular human insulin for adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Intensive glycaemic control vs conventional glucose control

Intensive glycaemic control showed no clear difference in all‐cause mortality compared with conventional glycaemic control (moderate certainty).

• Targeting intensive glycaemic control versus targeting conventional glycaemic control for type 2 diabetes mellitus 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1 [0.92, 1.08]
  24 studies · 34325 participants
  Moderate