Kirwan 2013.

Study characteristics
Methods	Diabetes self‐management smartphone application for adults with type 1 diabetes: randomized controlled trial Patient RCT, conducted with patients registered with Diabetes Australia in New South Wales, Queensland, as well as advertisements in a type 1 diabetes national newsletter. In Australia. Two arms: 1. Control (control arm) and 2. Intervention (intervention arm)
Participants	Control arm N: 36 Intervention arm N: 36 Diabetes type: type I Mean age: 35.2 ± 10.4 % Male: 39.0 Longest follow‐up: 9 months
Interventions	Control arm: None Intervention arm: 1) Case management 2) Facilitated relay of clinical information 3) Patient education 4) Promotion of self‐management
Outcomes	1) HbA1c, mean % (SD) Control arm: pre 8.5 (0.9), post 8.6 (1.2) Intervention arm: pre 9.1 (1.2), post 7.8 (0.8)
Funding source	This study was funded by Central Queensland University, Australia. C Vandelanotte is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (#519778) and National Heart Foundation of Australia (#PH 07B 3303) postdoctoral research fellowship. M Kirwan is supported by a Queensland Government, Department of Tourism, Regional Development and Industry, SmartFutures PhD Scholarship.
Notes	—
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: "…randomized patients using a freely available online randomization program."
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Assuming they are being randomised as they are enrolled. Quote: "…was used during the 3 month rolling recruitment to ensure roughly equal number of patients were allocated to each comparison group."
Patient's baseline characteristics (selection bias)	Low risk	More females in control group (P = 0.02).
Patient's baseline outcomes (selection bias)	High risk	HbA1c P = 0.02.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)	High risk	~22% lost to follow‐up in control and ~31% in intervention; reasons for loss to follow‐up could not be provided, since study participants could not be re‐contacted.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) and of outcome assessors (detection bias)	Unclear risk	Primary outcome: HbA1c, collected through a pathology laboratory, need to describe method.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	< 2005 approach used since no protocol; methods match results.
Risk of contamination (other bias)	High risk	Quote: "Although patients in the control group were instructed not to use any mobile applications to self‐manage their diabetes during the study period, it is possible they did."
Other bias	Low risk	Information not available.