Fischer 2012.

Study characteristics
Methods	Nurse‐run, telephone‐based outreach to improve lipids in people with diabetes Patient RCT, conducted at Denver Health's Westside Family Health Center (Westside Clinic). Serves a large Latino minority population. In USA. Two arms: 1. Control (control arm) and 2. Intervention (intervention arm)
Participants	Control arm N: 381 Intervention arm N: 381 Diabetes type: type 1 and type 2 Mean age: NR ± NR % Male: NR Longest follow‐up: 20 months
Interventions	Control arm: 1) Patient reminders Intervention arm: 1) Case management 2) Promotion of self‐management 3) Patient reminders
Outcomes	1) Controlled hypertension (< 130/80 mmHg), N under control (%) Control arm: pre 168 (44), post 170 (45) Intervention arm: pre 186 (49), post NR (NR)
Funding source	This study was funded by the American Diabetes Association
Notes	—
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Does not describe, states that they were randomised.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Does not describe, states that they were randomised.
Patient's baseline characteristics (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Gender (P = 0.05), creatine levels (P = 0.01), cerebrovascular disease (P = 0.04).
Patient's baseline outcomes (selection bias)	Low risk	LDL (P = 0.84); HbA1c (P = 0.13); SBP (P = 0.96); DBP (P = 0.86); statin (P = 0.69); antihypertensive ACE (P = 0.58); beta‐blocker (P = 0.49).
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)	High risk	Intention‐to‐treat analysis done, numbers and reasons for loss to follow‐up not provided; they state that 65 of those in intervention group lost to follow‐up. Baseline based on those randomised.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) and of outcome assessors (detection bias)	Low risk	Objective laboratory methods not described. Data analysts were not blinded. Nurse who had delivered the intervention was also not blinded. However, it seems like they gathered the laboratory data from the clinic's medical records, which would mean that despite blinding status, there would be little influence for altering these laboratory results.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Protocol matches and the study design was published: Fischer H, Mackenzie T, McCullen K, Everhart R, Estacio RO. Design of a nurse‐run, telephone‐based intervention to improve lipids in diabetics. Contemporary Clinical Trials. 2008; 29: 809‐816.
Risk of contamination (other bias)	High risk	Quote: "…participants may have used services in other healthcare centres…given the nurse also interacted with control patients, contamination of the intervention was a possibility."
Other bias	Low risk	Information not available.