Structured population data were available for 5 of 5 supporting studies. 5 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 5 studies described adult participants.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, baseline_within_group, placebo.

Pioglitazone 15 mg/day;Glimepiride 2 mg/day

Empagliflozin 10 mg/day;Glimepiride 2 mg/day

Empagliflozin 10 mg/day;Pioglitazone 15 mg/day

Core clinician-reference fields are available or not applicable.

Participants received empagliflozin as a third-line therapy in addition to ongoing metformin and DPP-4 inhibitors.

Empagliflozin 10 mg/day

Participants were randomised to receive empagliflozin 10 mg/day ( n = 61)

Participants received pioglitazone as a third-line therapy in addition to ongoing metformin and DPP-4 inhibitors.

Pioglitazone 15 mg/day

Participants were randomised to receive pioglitazone 15 mg/day ( n = 58)

Participants received glimepiride as a third-line therapy in addition to ongoing metformin and DPP-4 inhibitors.

Glimepiride 2 mg/day

Participants were randomised to receive glimepiride 2 mg/day ( n = 57)

Adding medications improves blood sugar control in diabetes patients.

Not extracted from the authoritative source.

Clinician-reference record is usable with limitations in: comparator.

Patients received tofogliflozin as monotherapy for the first 24 weeks.

Tofogliflozin Monotherapy

40 eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive tofogliflozin 20 mg (n = 21) or pioglitazone 15–30 mg (n = 19) as monotherapy for the first 24 weeks.

Patients received pioglitazone as monotherapy for the first 24 weeks.

Pioglitazone Monotherapy

Patients who completed 24 weeks of monotherapy and met the inclusion criteria were studied for an additional 24 weeks to determine the effects of the combination therapy.

Combination Therapy

The combination therapy was initiated if HbA1c was 6.0% or higher at the end of 24 weeks of monotherapy.

Combination therapy improves hepatic steatosis in T2DM patients

Pioglitazone monotherapy

Empagliflozin monotherapy

Participants received a combination of PIO and EMPA daily for 24 weeks.

Combination therapy with pioglitazone and empagliflozin

Participants were randomly assigned on a 1:1:1 ratio to receive once-daily PIO 15 mg plus EMPA 10 mg, PIO 15 mg alone, or EMPA 10 mg alone for 24 weeks.

Participants received PIO alone daily for 24 weeks.

Participants received EMPA alone daily for 24 weeks.

Combination therapy improves liver health in type 2 diabetes

Placebo

Patients received lobeglitazone as an add-on treatment for type 2 diabetes.

Lobeglitazone

Patients with T2DM who had an insufficient response to metformin and empagliflozin were randomised to receive either lobeglitazone 0.5 mg/day, or placebo once daily for 24 weeks.

Patients received a placebo as a comparator to lobeglitazone.

Lobeglitazone improves glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes patients

Participants received pioglitazone 15 mg once daily for 12 months.

Pioglitazone Group

Group I received pioglitazone 15 mg once daily, administered before breakfast for 12 months.

Participants received saroglitazar 4 mg once daily for 12 months.

Saroglitazar Group

Group II received saroglitazar 4 mg once daily, administered before breakfast for 12 months.

Saroglitazar improves liver health and glycemic control in type 2 diabetes

Structured population data were available for 3 of 3 supporting studies. 1 study described participants with type 2 diabetes. 3 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 3 of 3 supporting studies. 2 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 3 studies described adult participants.

1 supporting study does not have a displayable topic-matched quantitative effect.

1 study contains conflicting p-value and significance fields; those significance claims are suppressed.

Structured population data were available for 4 of 4 supporting studies. 3 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 4 studies described adult participants.

Upstream consistency scoring indicates mixed findings across the evidence.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, usual_care.

Structured population data were available for 8 of 8 supporting studies. 4 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 8 studies described adult participants.

1 relevant study has unresolved authoritative design evidence and does not contribute to design-specific or RoB-specific claims.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: baseline_within_group, unknown_unresolved, usual_care.

2 supporting studies have high, serious, critical, unclear, or unavailable risk-of-bias information.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: baseline_within_group, usual_care.

2 supporting studies do not have a displayable topic-matched quantitative effect.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, unknown_unresolved.

3 supporting studies have high, serious, critical, unclear, or unavailable risk-of-bias information.

Structured population data were available for 4 of 4 supporting studies. 4 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 4 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 5 of 5 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 2 studies with type 1 diabetes, 1 studies with type 2 diabetes. Age groups were heterogeneous: 2 studies with adult participants, 1 studies with youth participants.

2 relevant studies have unresolved authoritative design evidence and do not contribute to design-specific or RoB-specific claims.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: baseline_within_group, other, usual_care.

4 of 5 studies with duration data have follow-up of 12 weeks or less.

Structured population data were available for 10 of 11 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 5 studies with type 2 diabetes, 2 studies with type 1 diabetes. 8 studies described adult participants.

3 relevant studies have unresolved authoritative design evidence and do not contribute to design-specific or RoB-specific claims.

3 supporting studies do not have a displayable topic-matched quantitative effect.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, baseline_within_group, placebo, unknown_unresolved, usual_care.

1 supporting study lacks usable structured population information.

4 supporting studies have high, serious, critical, unclear, or unavailable risk-of-bias information.

Structured population data were available for 8 of 8 supporting studies. 7 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 7 studies described adult participants.

1 supporting study has high, serious, critical, unclear, or unavailable risk-of-bias information.

Structured population data were available for 4 of 4 supporting studies. 4 studies described participants with type 1 diabetes. 2 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 8 of 8 supporting studies. 6 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 7 studies described adult participants.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, unknown_unresolved, usual_care.

Structured population data were available for 8 of 8 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 4 studies with type 2 diabetes, 1 studies with type 1 diabetes. Age groups were heterogeneous: 4 studies with adult participants, 1 studies with youth participants.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, placebo, usual_care.

5 of 8 studies with duration data have follow-up of 12 weeks or less.

Structured population data were available for 3 of 3 supporting studies. 3 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 3 studies described adult participants.

3 of 3 studies with duration data have follow-up of 12 weeks or less.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, placebo.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, baseline_within_group.

Structured population data were available for 3 of 3 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 1 studies with type 1 diabetes, 1 studies with type 2 diabetes. 2 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 13 of 13 supporting studies. 11 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 12 studies described adult participants.

4 relevant studies have unresolved authoritative design evidence and do not contribute to design-specific or RoB-specific claims.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, baseline_within_group, usual_care.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: unknown_unresolved, usual_care.

Structured population data were available for 3 of 3 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 2 studies with type 2 diabetes, 1 studies with type 1 diabetes. Age groups were heterogeneous: 2 studies with adult participants, 1 studies with youth participants.

Structured population data were available for 12 of 12 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 9 studies with type 2 diabetes, 1 studies with type 1 diabetes. 12 studies described adult participants.

9 supporting studies have high, serious, critical, unclear, or unavailable risk-of-bias information.

Structured population data were available for 5 of 5 supporting studies. 5 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 4 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 3 of 3 supporting studies. 2 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 2 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 2 of 3 supporting studies. 2 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 2 studies described adult participants.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, placebo, unknown_unresolved.

Structured population data were available for 10 of 10 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 8 studies with type 2 diabetes, 2 studies with type 1 diabetes. Age groups were heterogeneous: 8 studies with adult participants, 1 studies with youth participants.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, other, usual_care.

3 studies contain conflicting p-value and significance fields; those significance claims are suppressed.

Structured population data were available for 4 of 4 supporting studies. 2 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 4 studies described adult participants.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: other, usual_care.

2 of 4 studies with duration data have follow-up of 12 weeks or less.

Structured population data were available for 4 of 4 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 2 studies with type 2 diabetes, 1 studies with type 1 diabetes. 4 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 11 of 11 supporting studies. 10 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 11 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 6 of 6 supporting studies. 6 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 6 studies described adult participants.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: active_comparator, baseline_within_group, unknown_unresolved, usual_care.

Structured population data were available for 7 of 7 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 2 studies with type 2 diabetes, 1 studies with type 1 diabetes. 5 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 5 of 5 supporting studies. 3 studies described participants with type 2 diabetes. 4 studies described adult participants.

Structured population data were available for 5 of 5 supporting studies. Diabetes type was heterogeneous: 4 studies with type 2 diabetes, 1 studies with type 1 diabetes. 3 studies described adult participants.

Evidence uses heterogeneous comparison contexts: baseline_within_group, placebo, usual_care.

Pioglitazone × HbA1c

Available supporting studies

Adding medications improves blood sugar control in diabetes patients.

Combination therapy improves hepatic steatosis in T2DM patients

Combination therapy improves liver health in type 2 diabetes

Lobeglitazone improves glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes patients

Saroglitazar improves liver health and glycemic control in type 2 diabetes