Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

7 questions · 7 findings · 1 reviews · Metabolic and Endocrine Disorders

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 1 · 14.3%Moderate 5 · 71.4%High 1 · 14.3%

Intensive glycaemic control vs conventional glucose control

All‐cause mortality · patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

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

1 finding from 1 review · compare the 2 reviews

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

Intensive glycaemic control vs conventional glucose control

Cardiovascular mortality · patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

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

1 finding from 1 review

Targeting intensive glycaemic control versus targeting conventional glycaemic control for type 2 diabetes mellitus 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.06 [0.94, 1.21]
22 studies · 34177 participants
Moderate

Intensive glycaemic control vs conventional glucose control

Non‐fatal MI · patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Intensive glycaemic control probably leads to lower non‐fatal myocardial infarction compared with conventional glycaemic control (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Targeting intensive glycaemic control versus targeting conventional glycaemic control for type 2 diabetes mellitus 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.87 [0.77, 0.98]
14 studies · 30417 participants
Moderate

Intensive glycaemic control vs conventional glucose control

Non‐fatal stroke · patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Intensive glycaemic control showed no clear difference in non‐fatal stroke compared with conventional glycaemic control (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Targeting intensive glycaemic control versus targeting conventional glycaemic control for type 2 diabetes mellitus 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1 [0.84, 1.19]
13 studies · 30003 participants
Moderate

Intensive glycaemic control vs conventional glucose control

Amputation of lower extremity · patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Intensive glycaemic control may leads to lower amputation of lower extremity compared with conventional glycaemic control (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Targeting intensive glycaemic control versus targeting conventional glycaemic control for type 2 diabetes mellitus 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.65 [0.45, 0.94]
11 studies · 11200 participants
Low

Intensive glycaemic control vs conventional glucose control

End‐stage renal disease · patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Intensive glycaemic control showed no clear difference in end‐stage renal disease compared with conventional glycaemic control (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Targeting intensive glycaemic control versus targeting conventional glycaemic control for type 2 diabetes mellitus 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.87 [0.71, 1.06]
8 studies · 28145 participants
Moderate

Intensive glycaemic control vs conventional glucose control

Severe hypoglycaemia · patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Intensive glycaemic control leads to higher hypoglycaemia ‐ Severe hypoglycaemia compared with conventional glycaemic control (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Targeting intensive glycaemic control versus targeting conventional glycaemic control for type 2 diabetes mellitus 2013 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 2.18 [1.53, 3.11]
17 studies · 28794 participants
High