Table 5: Assessment of quality of evidence.

Question: Should Jinlida plus Antidiabetics versus Antidiabetics be used in Antidiabetics?
Bibliography: Jinlida plus Antidiabetics versus Antidiabetics for T2DM

Quality assessment Summary of Findings

Participants
(studies)
Follow up
Risk of
bias
InconsistencyIndirectnessImprecisionPublication
bias
Overall
quality of
evidence
Study event rates (%)Relative
Effect
(95%
CI)
Anticipated absolute
effects
With ControlWith Jinlida
Plus
Antidiabetics
Risk
With Control
Risk
difference
with Jinlida
plus
Antidiabetics
(95% CI)

HbA1C (CRITICAL OUTCOME: better indicated by higher values)

1810 (15 studies) 12 weeksno serious risk of no serious inconsistencyno serious indirectnessno serious imprecisionundetected⊕⊕⊕⊕ 902908-The mean hba1c in the intervention groups was 0.65 lower (0.73 to 0.56 lower)

FBG (CRITICAL OUTCOME: better indicated by higher values)

1820 (15 studies) 12 weeksno serious risk of no serious inconsistencyno serious indirectnessno serious imprecisionundetected⊕⊕⊕⊕ 907913-The mean fbg in the intervention groups was 0.89 lower (1.08 to 0.7 lower)

2hPG (CRITICAL OUTCOME: better indicated by higher values)

1820 (15 studies) 12 weeksno serious risk of no serious inconsistencyno serious indirectnessno serious imprecisionundetected⊕⊕⊕⊕ 907913-The mean 2hpg in the intervention groups was 1.62 lower (1.93 to 1.32 lower)

HOMA- (IMPORTANT OUTCOME: better indicated by lower values)

992 (7 studies) 12 weeksno serious inconsistencyno serious indirectnessno serious reporting bias strongly suspected⊕⊕⊝⊝ due to risk of bias, publication bias499493-The mean homa-β in the intervention groups was 0.5 lower (0.62 to 0.37 lower)

Question: Should Jinlida plus Antidiabetics versus Antidiabetics be used in Antidiabetics?
Bibliography: Jinlida plus Antidiabetics versus Antidiabetics for T2DM

Quality assessment Summary of Findings

Participants
(studies)
Follow up
Risk of
bias
InconsistencyIndirectnessImprecisionPublication
bias
Overall
quality of
evidence
Study event rates (%)Relative
Effect
(95%
CI)
Anticipated absolute
effects
With
Control
With Jinlida
Plus
Antidiabetics
Risk
With
Control
Risk
difference
with Jinlida
plus
Antidiabetics
(95% CI)

HOMA-IR (IMPORTANT OUTCOME: better indicated by lower values)

1084 (8 studies) 12 weeksno serious inconsistencyno serious no serious reporting bias strongly suspected⊕⊕⊝⊝ due to risk of bias, publication bias539545-The mean homa-ir in the intervention groups was 1.82 lower (3.1 to 0.54 lower)

BMI (IMPORTANT OUTCOME: better indicated by lower values)

686 (5 studies) 12 weeksno serious inconsistencyno serious indirectnessno serious reporting bias strongly suspected⊕⊕⊝⊝ due to risk of bias, publication bias343343-The mean bmi in the intervention groups was 1.07 lower (2.08 to 0.06 lower)

explanation was provided.