Rossi 2010.

Study characteristics
Methods	Diabetes Interactive Diary: a new telemedicine system enabling flexible diet and insulin therapy while improving quality of life: an open‐label, international, multicenter, randomized study RCT (NA clusters and NA providers), conducted in 1) The study involved seven Diabetes Outpatient Clinics: 3 in Italy, 2 in England and 2 in Spain. 2) The course was provided as an outpatient programme of 3 encounters with the physician and/or dietitian in Italy 2 arms: 1. Control (standard carbohydrate counting educational programme) (control arm) and 2. Intervention (DID system) (intervention arm)
Participants	Control arm N: 63 Intervention arm N: 67, NA, NA Diabetes type: 1 Mean age: 35.74 ± NR % Male: 42.96 Longest follow‐up: 6 months
Interventions	Control arm: (standard carbohydrate counting educational programme) Intervention arm: (DID system) 1) Case management 2) Facilitated relay of clinical information 3) Promotion of self‐management
Outcomes	Glycated haemoglobin Systolic blood pressure Diastolic blood pressure Low‐density lipoprotein Harms
Funding source	Funding for this study was provided by Me.Te.Da. and Lifescan, Milpitas, CA
Notes	—
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Randomisation was performed through a telephone call to the co‐ordinating centre. Random lists were stratified by centre. To ensure equal allocation rates within centres, permuted block randomisation was used.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Randomisation was performed through a telephone call to the co‐ordinating centre. Random lists were stratified by centre. To ensure equal allocation rates within centres, permuted block randomisation was used.
Patient's baseline characteristics (selection bias)	Low risk	Table 1 ‐ P values greater than 0.05.
Patient's baseline outcomes (selection bias)	Low risk	Table 1 ‐ P values greater than 0.05 except for triglycerides at 0.03.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)	High risk	Loss of 2 in control, loss of 9 in intervention group; 3% vs 13%, respectively. Reasons provided.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) and of outcome assessors (detection bias)	Unclear risk	Objective measures for HbA1c, cholesterol, BP, harms, subjective measure for hypo/hyperglycaemia
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Unclear risk	No protocol registered. Outcomes match methods.
Risk of contamination (other bias)	Low risk	There does not appear to be any overlap between groups
Other bias	Low risk	None identified.