|
| HECM + drugs compared to drugs for diabetes |
| Patient or population: diabetes |
| Setting: community |
| Intervention: HECM + drugs |
| Comparison: drugs |
Outcome
No. of participants (studies) | Relative effect (95% CI) | Anticipated absolute effects (95% CI) | Certainty |
| Control | HECM∗ | Difference |
Control rate: DBP decreased more than 20 mmHg or back to normal assessed with blood pressure level
No. of participants: 426 (3 RCTs) | RR 1.58 (1.21 to 2.05) | 34.7% | 54.9% (42 to 71.2) | 20.2% more (7.3 more to 36.5 more) | ⊕○○○
Very lowa,b,c,d |
Systolic blood pressure level (SBP)
No. of participants: 560 (5 RCTs) | — | The mean systolic blood pressure level was 135.91 mmHg | — | MD 9.38 mmHg lower (10.51 lower to 8.25 lower) | ⊕○○○
Very lowa,b,d |
Diastolic blood pressure level (DBP)
No. of participants: 560 (5 RCTs) | — | The mean diastolic blood pressure level was 85.86 mmHg | — | MD 6.38 mmHg lower (7.44 lower to 5.32 lower) | ⊕○○○
Very lowa,d |
GRADE working group grades of evidence.
High certainty: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect. |
| Moderate certainty: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate. The true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different. |
| Low certainty: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited. The true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect. |
| Very low certainty: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate. The true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect. |
| Explanations |
| (a) Most of the trials had an unclear risk of selection bias, detective bias, or other bias, all of them had a high risk of performance bias. |
| (b) There was potential statistical heterogeneity among trials (I-square value >50%). |
| (c) Number of events less than 300. |
| (d) All the included trials published in China with positive results and a small sample size. |
|
