Whitlock 2000.

Study characteristics
Methods	Telemedicine improved diabetic management RCT (NA clusters and NA providers), conducted in 1) Home telemonitoring, multidisciplinary diabetic education classes at Eisenhower Army Medical Center. 2) The 2 physicians made all diabetic management decisions for the patients in the intervention and control groups. The case manager reinforced care plans with the patients and consulted with the physicians weekly. A team, including the case manager, clinical co‐ordinator, and/or a technician, visited each patient's home to install the unit and train and instruct the patient on the Aviva 20/20 and later the Aviva 10/10 system and how it would be used throughout the study. In United States of America. 2 arms: 1. Control (routine standard of care) (control arm) and 2. Intervention (telemedicine) (intervention arm)
Participants	Control arm N: 13 Intervention arm N: 15, NA, NA Diabetes type: 2 Mean age: 63 ± 4.45 % Male: 39.28 Longest follow‐up: 3 months
Interventions	Control arm: (routine standard of care) 1) Patient education Intervention arm: (telemedicine) 1) Case management 2) Team change 3) Facilitated relay of clinical information 4) Patient education 5) Promotion of self‐management
Outcomes	Glycated haemoglobin
Funding source	This demonstration project was supported by a 1997 grant from the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense, Health Affairs, to evaluate applications of telemedicine technology in the management of the high cost of chronic disease
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.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)	Unclear risk	No report of dropout.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) and of outcome assessors (detection bias)	Low risk	Objective measure for HbA1c.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	High risk	No registered protocol. Lipid results are not explicitly reported, despite being measured.
Risk of contamination (other bias)	Unclear risk	"The two physicians made all diabetic management decisions for the patients in the intervention and control groups".
Other bias	Low risk	None.