Table 2.
Estimated effects of intervention compared to control on primary and secondary binary outcomes at end of study.
| Outcomes | Control, n (%) | Intervention, n (%) | Primary modela | |||
|
|
RRb (95% CI) | P value | ||||
| Primary outcome |
|
|||||
|
|
HbA1cc < 7.0% | xxx (xx.x) | xxx (xx.x) | x.xx (x.xx-x.xx) | .xx | |
| Secondary outcomes |
|
|||||
|
|
FBGd < 7.0 mmol/L | xxx (xx.x) | xxx (xx.x) | x.xx (x.xx-x.xx) | .xx | |
|
|
BPe < 140/80 mmHgf | xxx (xx.x) | xxx (xx.x) | x.xx (x.xx-x.xx) | .xx | |
|
|
LDL-Cg < 2.6 mmol/L | xxx (xx.x) | xxx (xx.x) | x.xx (x.xx-x.xx) | .xx | |
|
|
Composite diabetes controlh,i | xxx (xx.x) | xxx (xx.x) | x.xx (x.xx-x.xx) | .xx | |
aPrimary model: log-binomial regression with generalized estimating equation (GEE) with adjustment of the baseline value of the analyzed outcome and clustering. The logistic regression with GEE will be employed as the alternative method in case of non-convergence, with indirectly derived relative risk reported.
bRR: relative risk.
cHbA1c: glycated hemoglobin.
dFBG: fasting blood glucose.
eBP: blood pressure.
fOnly systolic blood pressure at baseline and clustering were adjusted in the primary model for BP control.
gLDL-C: low-density lipoprotein cholesterol.
hComposite diabetes control: defined as HbA1c level <7.0%, BP <140/80 mmHg and LDL-C <2.6 mmol/L.
iNo baseline variable was adjusted in the primary model for the composite diabetes control.