Rossi 2013.

Study characteristics
Methods	Impact of the "Diabetes Interactive Diary" telemedicine system on metabolic control, risk of hypoglycemia, and quality of life: a randomized clinical trial in Type 1 diabetes Patient RCT, conducted in 12 Italian diabetes outpatient clinics, Italy Two arms: 1. Standard care (control arm) and 2. DID (intervention arm)
Participants	Control arm N: 64 Intervention arm N: 63 Diabetes type: type 1 Mean age: 36.9 ± 10.5 % Male: NR Longest follow‐up: 6 months
Interventions	Control arm: 1) Facilitated relay of clinical information 2) Patient education Intervention arm: 1) Facilitated relay of clinical information 2) Promotion of self‐management
Outcomes	1) HbA1c, mean % (SE) Control arm: pre 8.5 (0.1), post 8.1 (0.1) Intervention arm: pre 8.4 (0.1), post 7.9 (0.1) 2) SBP, mean mmHg (SE) Control arm: pre 120.0 (1.3), post 118.0 (1.6) Intervention arm: pre 119.0 (1.4), post 118.3 (1.6) 3) DBP, mean mmHg (SE) Control arm: pre 71.5 (1.0), post 71.7 (1.0) Intervention arm: pre 72.9 (1.0), post 72.2 (1.0) 4) LDL, mean mg/dL (SE) Control arm: pre 109.1 (3.6), post 114.1 (5.2) Intervention arm: pre 109.4 (3.7), post 117.6 (5.3)
Funding source	The study was supported by an unconditional grant from Sanofi‐Aventis SpA, Milan, Italy. Materials for SMBG (glucose meters, strips, lancets and control solutions) were supplied by LifeScan Inc., Milpitas, CA. Me.Te.Da. s.r.l., San Benedetto del Tronto, Italy, is the software company that developed the DID system.
Notes	—
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	They said they used a random list, but do not describe how they generated it.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Used central allocation through a telephone call to the co‐ordinating centre.
Patient's baseline characteristics (selection bias)	High risk	Age (P = 0.04).
Patient's baseline outcomes (selection bias)	Low risk	Information not available.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)	High risk	Reasons between arms seem balanced, but ~11% lost to follow‐up in control and ~12.7% in intervention. Authors also state that dropout was not directly related to Diabetes Interactive Diary (DID) intervention.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) and of outcome assessors (detection bias)	Low risk	Primary outcome: HbA1c. Secondary outcomes: BP and LDL. Used standard methods at laboratories.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Matches protocol.
Risk of contamination (other bias)	High risk	Not cluster, and physicians cared for both intervention and control, sending back SMS.
Other bias	Low risk	Information not available.