Table 1—

Methodological assessment of included articles

CriterionNumber of cohort studies meeting criterion (n = 13)Number of case reports meeting criterion (n = 8)
Was the study prospective?2 (15)NA
Was the study sample representative of the institution’s population of D+HUS patients? (i.e., Were all patients with D+HUS within a specified time period included, or was a random sample of these patients included?)13 (100)NA
Were clear diagnostic criteria for HUS specified?5 (38)6 (75)
Were there clear methods for confirming that the HUS was primary?11 (85)8 (100)
Were baseline characteristics (e.g., age, sex, diarrhea, etc.) described for all patients?8 (62)6 (75)
Were administered treatments (e.g., dialysis, insulin) described for all patients?4 (31)6 (75)
Was a clear definition for diabetes or glucose intolerance specified?9 (69)7 (88)
Were all patients with D+HUS tested for diabetes or glucose intolerance?0 (0)NA
Were pancreatic autoantibodies measured in all those who developed diabetes?1 (8)8 (100)
Were long-term outcomes for patients with diabetes reported?8 (62)4 (50)
Was the total mortality reported?9 (69)8 (100)
Was the incidence of end-stage renal disease reported?6 (46)3 (38)
Was the incidence of long-term central nervous system sequelae reported?5 (38)0 (0)
Was the mean follow-up >6 months?8 (62)4 (50)
If yes, was the loss to follow-up <10%?4 (31)NA
  • Data are n (%). NA, not applicable.