Cochrane · systematic review · CD013178
Interventions for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus fasting during Ramadan
Lee, SW, Chen, WS, Sellappans, R, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2023 · Cochrane Library
Metabolic and Endocrine DisordersAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
49
current version
GRADE rated
24
No studies
25
Included studies
NR
No studies 25 · 51%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 21 · 42.9%Low 2 · 4.1%Moderate 1 · 2%High 0 · 0%
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.
Questions and results
DPP‐4 inhibitors versus sulphonylureas
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Hypoglycaemic episodes a) Non‐serious hypoglycaemia DPP‐4 inhibitors vs sulphonylureas | RR 0.53 [0.41, 0.68] | 4 studies · 2495 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Health‐related quality of life DPP‐4 inhibitors vs sulphonylureas | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse events other than hypoglycaemia DPP‐4 inhibitors vs sulphonylureas | RR 0.9 [0.52, 1.54] | 3 studies · 2426 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |
All‐cause mortality DPP‐4 inhibitors vs sulphonylureas | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 2426 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |
Treatment satisfaction DPP‐4 inhibitors vs sulphonylureas | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
HbA1c (%) DPP‐4 inhibitors vs sulphonylureas | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 626 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |
Self‐care DPP‐4 inhibitors vs sulphonylureas | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Meglitinides versus sulphonylureas
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Hypoglycaemic episodes a) Non‐serious hypoglycaemia Meglitinides vs sulphonylureas | RR 0.72 [0.4, 1.28] | 2 studies · 273 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Health‐related quality of life Meglitinides vs sulphonylureas | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse events other than hypoglycaemia Meglitinides vs sulphonylureas | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
All‐cause mortality Meglitinides vs sulphonylureas | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Treatment satisfaction Meglitinides vs sulphonylureas | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
HbA1c (%) Meglitinides vs sulphonylureas | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 235 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision, indirectness |
SGLT‐2 inhibitors versus sulphonylureas
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Hypoglycaemic episodes a) Non‐serious hypoglycaemia SGLT‐2 inhibitors vs sulphonylureas | RR 0.28 [0.1, 0.79] | 1 study · 110 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Health‐related quality of life SGLT‐2 inhibitors vs sulphonylureas | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse events other than hypoglycaemia SGLT‐2 inhibitors vs sulphonylureas | RR 1 [0.6, 1.67] | 1 study · 110 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
All‐cause mortality SGLT‐2 inhibitors vs sulphonylureas | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Treatment satisfaction SGLT‐2 inhibitors vs sulphonylureas | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
HbA1c (%) SGLT‐2 inhibitors vs sulphonylureas | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 103 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
GLP‐1 analogues inhibitors versus sulphonylureas
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Hypoglycaemic episodes a) Non‐serious hypoglycaemia GLP‐1 analogues inhibitors vs sulphonylureas | RR 0.45 [0.28, 0.74] | 3 studies · 596 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Health‐related quality of life GLP‐1 analogues inhibitors vs sulphonylureas | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse events other than hypoglycaemia GLP‐1 analogues inhibitors vs sulphonylureas | RR 1.5 [0.86, 2.61] | 3 studies · 499 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
All‐cause mortality GLP‐1 analogues inhibitors vs sulphonylureas | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Treatment satisfaction GLP‐1 analogues inhibitors vs sulphonylureas | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 62 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
HbA1c (%) GLP‐1 analogues inhibitors vs sulphonylureas | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 246 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Insulin analogues versus biphasic insulin
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Hypoglycaemic episodes a) Non‐serious hypoglycaemia Insulin analogues vs biphasic insulin | RR 0.43 [0.13, 1.4] | 2 studies · 500 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Health‐related quality of life Insulin analogues vs biphasic insulin | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Any adverse events other than hypoglycaemia Insulin analogues vs biphasic insulin | RR 0.83 [0.44, 1.56] | 2 studies · 500 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
All‐cause mortality Insulin analogues vs biphasic insulin | RR 3.02 [0.12, 73.53] | 1 study · 263 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Treatment satisfaction Insulin analogues vs biphasic insulin | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
HbA1c (%) Insulin analogues vs biphasic insulin | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 245 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Telemedicine versus usual care
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Hypoglycaemic episodes a) Non‐serious hypoglycaemia Telemedicine vs usual care | RR 0.42 [0.24, 0.74] | 2 studies · 121 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Health‐related quality of life Defined using: EQ‐5D‐3L (higher values represent better quality of life) Telemedicine vs usual care | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 85 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Adverse events other than hypoglycaemia Telemedicine vs usual care | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
All‐cause mortality Telemedicine vs usual care | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Treatment satisfaction Telemedicine vs usual care | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
HbA1c (%) Telemedicine vs usual care | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 85 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Patient education versus usual care
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Hypoglycaemic episodes (a) Non‐serious hypoglycaemia Patient education vs usual care | RR 1.17 [0.82, 1.66] | 2 studies · 377 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |
Health‐related quality of life Patient education vs usual care | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse events other than hypoglycaemia Patient education vs usual care | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
All‐cause mortality Patient education vs usual care | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Treatment satisfaction Patient education vs usual care | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
HbA1c (%) Patient education vs usual care | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 422 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |
Drug dosage reduction versus usual care
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Hypoglycaemic episodes (a) Non‐serious hypoglycaemia Drug dosage reduction vs usual care | RR 0.18 [0.11, 0.3] | 1 study · 678 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Health‐related quality of life Drug dosage reduction vs usual care | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Adverse events other than hypoglycaemia Drug dosage reduction vs usual care | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 678 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
All‐cause mortality Drug dosage reduction vs usual care | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Treatment satisfaction Drug dosage reduction vs usual care | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
HbA1c (%) Drug dosage reduction vs usual care | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |