Summary of findings for the main comparison. Ipomoea batatas (Caiapo) tablets compared to placebo for type 2 diabetes mellitus.
| Ipomoea batatas (Caiapo) tablets compared to placebo for type 2 diabetes mellitus | ||||||
| Patient or population: people with type 2 diabetes mellitus Settings: out‐patients Intervention:Ipomoea batatas (Caiapo) tablets Comparison: placebo | ||||||
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | No of Participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | |||||
| Placebo | Ipomoea batatas (Caiapo) tablets | |||||
| Morbidity | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | See comment | See comment | Not investigated |
| Adverse effects Follow‐up: 1.5 to 5 months | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | 140 (3) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ very lowa | 2 out of 3 studies reported adverse eventsb |
| Health‐related quality of life | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | See comment | See comment | Not investigated |
| Well‐being | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | See comment | See comment | Not investigated |
| Functional outcomes | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | See comment | See comment | Not investigated |
| Costs | See comment | See comment | Not estimable | See comment | See comment | Not investigated |
| HbA1c [%] (final values) Follow‐up: 3 or 5 months | Final values for HbA1c across control groups ranged from 6.5 to 7.1 | Final values for Hba1c in the intervention groups were 0.3 lower (0.6 to 0.04 lower) | ‐ | 122 (2) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ very lowc | ‐ |
| *The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: confidence interval; | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect Moderate quality: further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate Low quality: further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate Very low quality: we are very uncertain about the estimate | ||||||
aDowngraded by three due to high risk of bias (insufficient information on the process of randomisation, blinding, selective outcome and incomplete data reporting), small number of trials and participants and no replication of trials by other authors (same investigating team throughout) bMild gastrointestinal symptoms such as nausea, diarrhoea, constipation, gastric pain and abdominal distension
cDowngraded by three due to imprecision, high risk of attrition bias and indirectness