Sequeira 2013.

Study characteristics
Methods	Continuous glucose monitoring pilot in low‐income type 1 diabetes patients Patient RCT, conducted in an endocrine Fellows Diabetes Clinic at the Roybal Comprehensive Health Center in East Los Angeles, USA Two arms: 1. SMBG (control arm) and 2. CGM (intervention arm)
Participants	Control arm N: 20 Intervention arm N: 19 Diabetes type: type 1 Mean age: 40.0 ± 13.0 % Male: 52.0 Longest follow‐up: 7 months
Interventions	Control arm: 1) Facilitated relay of clinical information 2) Promotion of self‐management 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 8.3 (NR), post 7.8 (NR) Intervention arm: pre 8.3 (NR), post 8.0 (NR)
Funding source	This project was funded by JDRF Artificial Pancreas grant 22‐2006‐1119
Notes	—
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not reported.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not reported.
Patient's baseline characteristics (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not reported.
Patient's baseline outcomes (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not reported: HbA1c.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)	High risk	~10% lost to follow‐up in N1; ~21% in N2, provide numbers of lost to follow‐up, however, more losses in N2 (double), reasons after 1 week not really provided for all dropouts.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) and of outcome assessors (detection bias)	Low risk	Primary outcome: HbA1c, used a DCA Vantage 2000 Analyzer.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	< 2005 approach used since no protocol; methods match results.
Risk of contamination (other bias)	Low risk	Information not available.
Other bias	Low risk	Information not available.