Behavioral Programs for Diabetes Mellitus

similar results were found for youth (MD, -0.33; 95% CI, -1.65 to 0.99; I 2 =69%). 87,92,108 and
adults (MD, -0.35; 95% CI, -0.81 to 0.11). 107
At the end of 6 months postintervention, our meta-analysis for youth and adults combined (4
trials [259 adults, 91,107 208 youth 92,108 ]) showed that HbA 1c improved for those receiving a
behavioral program compared with those receiving an active control (MD, -0.44; 95% CI, -0.69
to -0.19); this reduction in HbA 1c is clinically important. For youth, the difference was not
statistically significant (MD, -0.60; 95% CI, -2.56 to 1.36); 92,108 for adults, the difference was not
statistically significant and the effect size was not clinically important (MD, -0.38; 95% CI, -0.93
to -0.17). 91,107
At the end of 12-month followup, our meta-analysis for youth and adults combined (3 trials
[110 adults, 107 195 youth 92,108 ) found no difference in HbA 1c (MD, -0.44; 95% CI, -1.04 to 0.16).
For youth, the difference was statistically significant and clinically important (MD, -0.52; 95%
CI, -1.04 to 0.00); the behavioral program studied by Weinger et al., 107 failed to demonstrate any
difference (MD, -0.14; 95% CI, -0.61 to 0.33).
Figure 8. Behavioral programs for type 1 diabetes compared with active control: HbA 1c at end of
intervention
CI = confidence interval; HbA 1c = hemoglobin A 1c ; n = number of participants; SD = standard deviation
35