Who was studied, and how
Four numbers in the abstract
Where each one falls
Where it lands on the map
What it changes
Among 3 other studies
5,147people with type 2 diabetes, in this paper
The trial randomly assignedassigned by chance
pharmacological interventions
usual care or placebo
Lowered fasting blood sugar−0.11
No clear effect on long-term blood sugar−0.03
randomisedThe trial randomly assignedassigned by chance
behavioural interventions
usual care or placebo
Lowered fasting blood sugar−0.28
No clear effect on long-term blood sugar+0.18
randomisedthe abstract, start to end
… pharmacological (mean difference (MD), -0.11mmol/L; 95% confidence interval (CI), [-0.19, -0.02], p = 0.02, n = 2536) and behavioural interventions (MD, -0.28mmol//L; 95% CI, [-0.43, -0.12], p<0.001, n = 956) were effective in lowering fasting glucose, but not HbA1c (pharmacological MD, -0.03%; 95% CI, [-0.12, 0.06], p = 0.52, n = 1515; behavioural MD, 0.18%; 95% CI, [-0.07, 0.42], p = …
← favours treatmentfavours comparator →
could be chanceFasting glucosepharmacological interventions vs usual care or placebo
−0.11−0.19 to −0.02
Fasting glucosebehavioural interventions vs usual care or placebo
−0.28−0.43 to −0.12
HbA1cpharmacological interventions vs usual care or placebo
−0.03−0.12 to 0.06
HbA1cbehavioural interventions vs usual care or placebo
0.18−0.07 to 0.42
Diet, exercise & lifestyleGlycemic control
Diet, exercise & lifestyle × glycemic controlhelps?replicated
unlikelylikely
0.99not counted
← favours treatmentfavours comparator →
1 / 6