Clinical evidence dossier
Peer-support lifestyle program
HbA1c
Evidence signal
Evidence signal
Moderate
This is an authoritative evidence signal supplied by Clinical Reference. It is not a formal clinical grade, treatment recommendation, or pooled effect estimate.
Evidence snapshot
- Authoritative support records
- 3
- Supporting studies available for review
- 3
- Randomized trials
- 2
- Reported effects
- 5
Clinical conclusion
Peer-support lifestyle program shows a strong positive evidence signal for improving HbA1c across the studied comparisons.
The conclusion and evidence-signal classification are distinct authoritative fields and are reproduced as published.
Observed effects
Observed study estimates; not a pooled treatment effect.
Change from baseline
Absolute change
−0.6% to −0.6%
Change from baseline
Mean difference
−1.36% to 0.06%
Between-group effect
Mean difference
0.14% to 0.14%
Evidence composition
- Non-randomized studies
- 0
- Other designs
- 0
- Unresolved designs
- 1
- Magnitude-eligible effects
- 5
Consistency
Consistency classification
Consistent
- Positive
- 2
- No effect
- 0
- Mixed
- 1
- Negative
- 0
Population and applicability
Structured population data were available for 3 of 3 supporting studies. 1 study described participants with type 2 diabetes. 2 studies described adult participants.
This population information refers to the materialized supporting studies available for review. Omitted support records remain part of the authoritative support accounting and are available through the audit experience.
View reported population descriptions
These descriptions are reported across the supporting studies; they are not a single synthesized population.
- Low-income adults diagnosed with type 2 diabetes
- Participants engaged in community health programs
- Patients with diabetes treated in emergency departments.
- Individuals newly diagnosed with diabetes.
- Adults at risk for diabetes in workplace settings.
- Individuals seeking dietary interventions for weight management.
Limitations
- Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, baseline_within_group.
- 2 supporting studies have high, serious, critical, unclear, or unavailable risk-of-bias information.
Supporting evidence
Inspect the authoritative studies and omitted support records for this dossier.