Skip to main content

Table 3 Meta-analysis: risk of bias in individual randomized clinical trials evaluating interventions to improve compliance to lower glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) in patients with type 1 diabetes according to intervention category

From: Interventions to improve patients’ compliance with therapies aimed at lowering glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) in type 1 diabetes: systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized controlled clinical trials of psychological, telecare, and educational interventions

 

Selection bias

Performance bias

Detection bias

Attrition bias

Reporting bias

 

Random sequence generation

Allocation concealment

Blinding of participant and personnel

Blinding of outcome assessment

Incomplete outcome data

Selective reporting

Psychology category

 

 Ellis, 2005 –2007b

low

low

low

low

uncertain

low

 Nansel, 2007

low

low

low

low

high

uncertain

 Weinger, 2011a

low

low

low

low

uncertain

low

 Nansel, 2011

low

low

high

uncertain

high

low

 Mulvaney, 2010

low

low

uncertain

uncertain

uncertain

uncertain

 Franklin, 2006

low

low

low

uncertain

uncertain

low

Telecare category

 

 Montori, 2004

low

low

low

uncertain

uncertain

low

 Lawson, 2005

low

low

low

low

uncertain

low

 Farmer, 2005

low

low

low

low

uncertain

low

 Landau, 2011

low

low

low

low

uncertain

low

 Gay, 2006

low

low

low

low

uncertain

low

 Esmatjes, 2014

low

low

uncertain

uncertain

uncertain

low

Education category

 

 Cook, 2002

uncertain

uncertain

low

uncertain

uncertain

low

 Howe, 2005

uncertain

uncertain

uncertain

low

uncertain

low

 Weinger, 2011b

low

low

low

low

uncertain

low

 Nunn, 2006

low

low

low

low

uncertain

low

  1. aThe same study had three arms evaluated as: psychology versus individual care and education versus individual care interventions
  2. bFour published complementary reports