Skip to main content

Table 1 Summary of characteristics of the individual sources of evidence

From: Hypoglycaemia in older home-dwelling people with diabetes- a scoping review

First author, year (reference)

Place of origin

Population (n)

Age range

Setting

Study design

Data collection

Thematic focus/aim

Dunning, 2005 [29]

Australia

T2DMa (30)

33–84

Diabetes outpatient education centre

Cross-sectional

Structured interviews/observation of skills

Patient knowledge and self-management

Farmer, 2012 [30]

UK

DMb (4081)

45–77d

Ambulance calls

Retrospective observational

Records of emergency call assistance

Incidence, consequences

Feil, 2011 [31]

US

DM and dementia/cognitive impairment (497,900)

>  65

Research database (home-dwellers and nursing home)

Cross-sectional

Research database

Incidence, risk factors

Gehlaut, 2015 [32]

US

T2DM (108)

 

Endocrinology centre

Prospective observational, non-blinded

Continuous glucose monitoring

Incidence

Hambling, 2017 [33]

UK

T2DM and chronic kidney disease (1379)

73–83d

General practice

Cross-sectional

Medical records/audit

Risk factors

Harsch, 2018 [34]

Germany

T2DM (160)

47–101

Hospitalized patients

Retrospective survey

Standardized questionnaire and tests

Patient knowledge

Hewitt, 2010 [35]

UK

T2DM (1047)

75–100

General practice

Factorial cluster randomized trial

Interview and standardized tests

Patient knowledge and management

Holstein, 2003 [36]

Germany

DM (264)

4–95

Emergency admission to hospital

Cohort study

Clinical data (blood glucose measurements)

Incidence

Holstein, 2010 [37]

Germany

T2DM (139)

46–97

Emergency admission to hospital

Prospective observational study

Clinical data (blood glucose measurements)

Incidence,

risk factors

Kachroo, 2015 [38]

US

T2DM (21613)

65–100

Commercial database

Retrospective cohort

Medical records

Consequences

Lee, 2017 [39]

US

T2DM (1206)

64 (mean at baseline)

Ambulance calls, emergency department visits, hospitalization

Prospective cohort study

Medical records

Incidence,

risk factors

Lipska, 2013 [40]

US

T2DM (9094)

60 ± 10e,f

Community setting

Cohort study

Registry data and questionnaire

Risk factors

Lipska, 2015 [41]

US

DM (1288)

73 ± 6e

Community setting

Cross-sectional

Registry data

Risk factors

Parsaik, 2013 [42]

US

T2DM

63 ± 12e

Ambulance calls

Cohort study

Ambulance records

Incidence, consequences

Penfornis, 2015 [43]

France

T2DM and renal disease (980)

 

Outpatients (GP and diabetologist)

Cross-sectional

Clinical data registered by general practitioner

Risk factors

Rajendran, 2015 [44]

UK

T1DMc (59) and T2DM (106)

47–84

Emergency department care

Cross-sectional

Electronic patient records

Incidence, consequences

Reed, 2003 [45]

UK

DM (130)

 

Outpatients

Cross-sectional

Observations and structured questionnaire

Knowledge, self-management

Reifegerste, 2016 [46]

Germany

Informal caregivers of T2DM patients (488)

61 ± 14e

Outpatients (participants of disease management program)

Cross-sectional

Survey

Informal caregiver knowledge

Sotiropoulos, 2005 [47]

Greece

T2DM (207)

45–88

Hospital

Cross-sectional

Patient records, blood samples, questionnaire

Incidence, knowledge, risk factors

Thomson, 1991 [48]

UK

T2DM (45)

61–82

Hospital

Case-control

Structured interviews

Knowledge

Thorpe, 2015 [49]

USA

T2DM and dementia (15,880)

≥65

Mixed setting of home-dwellers, nursing home, hospital

Longitudinal retrospective cohort study

Patient records, registry data

Risk factors

Villani, 2016 [50]

USA

DM (12,411)

57 ± 21e

Ambulance service

Retrospective observational study

Ambulance reports

Incidence, consequences

Zaccardi, 2016 [51]

Australia

DM (79,172)

72% were > 60

Hospital admission

Longitudinal retrospective observational study

Hospital database

Incidence, consequences

  1. aT2DM, type 2 diabetes mellitus
  2. bDM, diabetes mellitus
  3. cT1DM, type 1 diabetes mellitus
  4. dinterquartile range
  5. emean ± standard deviation
  6. fage of informal caregivers