Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Study flow diagram.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 1

Study flow diagram.

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figures and Tables -
Figure 2

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Comparison 1 Dependency or death, Outcome 1 Dependency or death at the end of the follow‐up.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Dependency or death, Outcome 1 Dependency or death at the end of the follow‐up.

Comparison 1 Dependency or death, Outcome 2 Death.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Dependency or death, Outcome 2 Death.

Comparison 1 Dependency or death, Outcome 3 Diabetes mellitus versus no diabetes mellitus.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Dependency or death, Outcome 3 Diabetes mellitus versus no diabetes mellitus.

Comparison 1 Dependency or death, Outcome 4 Less than 30 days versus 90 days of follow‐up.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 1.4

Comparison 1 Dependency or death, Outcome 4 Less than 30 days versus 90 days of follow‐up.

Comparison 2 Functional neurological outcome, Outcome 1 NIHSS or ESS at the end of the follow‐up.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 Functional neurological outcome, Outcome 1 NIHSS or ESS at the end of the follow‐up.

Comparison 2 Functional neurological outcome, Outcome 2 Independent in daily activities.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 Functional neurological outcome, Outcome 2 Independent in daily activities.

Comparison 2 Functional neurological outcome, Outcome 3 Diabetes mellitus versus no diabetes mellitus.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.3

Comparison 2 Functional neurological outcome, Outcome 3 Diabetes mellitus versus no diabetes mellitus.

Comparison 2 Functional neurological outcome, Outcome 4 Less than 30 days versus 90 days of follow‐up.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 2.4

Comparison 2 Functional neurological outcome, Outcome 4 Less than 30 days versus 90 days of follow‐up.

Comparison 3 Hypoglycaemia, Outcome 1 Symptomatic hypoglycaemia.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 Hypoglycaemia, Outcome 1 Symptomatic hypoglycaemia.

Comparison 3 Hypoglycaemia, Outcome 2 Hypoglycaemia (with or without symptoms).
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 3.2

Comparison 3 Hypoglycaemia, Outcome 2 Hypoglycaemia (with or without symptoms).

Comparison 4 Mean glucose level, Outcome 1 Mean glucose level.
Figures and Tables -
Analysis 4.1

Comparison 4 Mean glucose level, Outcome 1 Mean glucose level.

Table 1. Risk of bias summary

Study

Generation of randomisation

Allocation concealment

Blinding:

participants and physicians

Blinding:

outcome to allocation group

Lost to follow‐up (%)

Vinychuk 2005

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

High risk

0

GIST‐UK 2007

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

Low risk

7.4

Staszewski 2011

Low risk

High risk

High risk

Low risk

0

THIS 2008

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

Low risk

0

Walters 2006

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

High risk

0

GRASP 2009

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

Low risk

1.4

Kreisel 2009

Low risk

Unclear risk

High risk

High risk

10

McCormick 2010

Low risk

Unclear risk

Unclear risk

High risk

Not reported

INSULINFARCT 2012

Low risk

Low risk

High risk

High risk

2.2

Vriesendorp 2009

High risk

High risk

High risk

High risk

15.2

Azevedo 2009

Low risk

Unclear risk

High risk

High risk

Not reported

Figures and Tables -
Table 1. Risk of bias summary
Comparison 1. Dependency or death

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Dependency or death at the end of the follow‐up Show forest plot

9

1516

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.99 [0.79, 1.23]

2 Death Show forest plot

9

1422

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.09 [0.85, 1.41]

3 Diabetes mellitus versus no diabetes mellitus Show forest plot

8

1482

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.97 [0.77, 1.21]

3.1 Diabetes mellitus

3

194

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.66 [0.35, 1.24]

3.2 No diabetes mellitus

6

1288

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.02 [0.81, 1.30]

4 Less than 30 days versus 90 days of follow‐up Show forest plot

9

1516

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.99 [0.79, 1.23]

4.1 30 days

5

289

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.74 [0.43, 1.25]

4.2 90 days

4

1227

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.05 [0.82, 1.34]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 1. Dependency or death
Comparison 2. Functional neurological outcome

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 NIHSS or ESS at the end of the follow‐up Show forest plot

8

1432

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.09 [‐0.19, 0.01]

2 Independent in daily activities Show forest plot

9

1224

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

1.03 [0.81, 1.32]

3 Diabetes mellitus versus no diabetes mellitus Show forest plot

8

1432

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.07 [‐0.18, 0.03]

3.1 Diabetes mellitus

3

146

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.06 [‐0.43, 0.31]

3.2 No diabetes mellitus

6

1286

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.08 [‐0.19, 0.03]

4 Less than 30 days versus 90 days of follow‐up Show forest plot

8

1432

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.09 [‐0.19, 0.01]

4.1 30 days

5

273

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.47 [‐0.72, ‐0.23]

4.2 90 days

3

1159

Std. Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.00 [‐0.12, 0.11]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 2. Functional neurological outcome
Comparison 3. Hypoglycaemia

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Symptomatic hypoglycaemia Show forest plot

10

1455

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

14.60 [6.62, 32.21]

2 Hypoglycaemia (with or without symptoms) Show forest plot

10

1455

Odds Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

18.41 [9.09, 37.27]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 3. Hypoglycaemia
Comparison 4. Mean glucose level

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Mean glucose level Show forest plot

8

1398

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

‐0.63 [‐0.80, ‐0.46]

Figures and Tables -
Comparison 4. Mean glucose level