Table 2.
Influence analysis assessment for the effect of lifestyle changes on T2D risk.
| Author (Removed) | Risk Ratio (RR) with 95% CI | P-Effect | I2 (%) | P-Heterogeneity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 0.53 [0.41, 0.67] | <0.001 | 63 | 0.01 |
| Da Qing IGT And Diabetes Study (Pan, 1997 [32]) | 0.53 [0.41, 0.67] | <0.001 | 55 | 0.052 |
| Diabetes Prevention Programme (Knowler, 2002 [34]) | 0.49 [0.37, 0.64] | <0.001 | 43 | 0.163 |
| European Diabetes Prevention RCT—Newcastle (Penn, 2009 [40]) | 0.57 [0.44, 0.74] | <0.001 | 69 | 0.005 |
| Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study (Tuomilehto, 2001 [33]) | 0.53 [0.41, 0.68] | <0.001 | 67 | 0.006 |
| Indian Diabetes Prevention Programme (Ramachandran, 2006 [37]) | 0.54 [0.41, 0.72] | <0.001 | 57 | 0.038 |
| Japanese Trial in IGT Males (Kosaka, 2005 [36]) | 0.48 [0.37, 0.63] | <0.001 | 67 | 0.006 |
| Lifestyle Intervention on Metabolic Syndrome (Bo, 2007 [38,39]) | 0.54 [0.42, 0.69] | <0.001 | 66 | 0.008 |
CI = confidence interval.