Table 3—

Domain scores from studies that could not be explored further meta-analytically

Cognitive domains
First author (ref.)Group 1Group 2Overall intelligenceWorking memoryLearning immediate memoryDelayed memoryPsychomotor efficiencySpeed of information processMotor speedAttentionCognitive flexibilityVisual perceptionLanguage
Hung et al. (33)Poor MCGood MC0.18−0.710.17
Skenazy et al. (19)Vis impNon vis imp0.230.29
Holmes (7)Poor MCGood MC−0.31−0.530.38
Holmes et al. (34)Poor MCGood MC−0.100.14−0.730.64
Prescott et al. (35)Good MCGood MC0
Widom et al. (21)Poor MCGood MC−0.330.170.89
Ryan et al. (27)ComplNo compl0.23−0.24−0.80−0.280.10−0.35
Gold et al. (38)IHANHA−0.330
Maran et al. (28)Poor MCGood MC0.45
Kramer et al. (30)Poor MCGood MC0.280
Strachan et al. (42)IHANHA−0.10−0.13−0.770−0.63−0.54
Ferguson et al. (8)RNo R−0.31−0.48−0.59−0.40−0.34
  • Data are Cohen’s d. Negative effects sizes reflect worse performance in group 1. Compl, diabetes complications; IHA, impaired awareness of hypoglycemia; MC, metabolic control; NHA, normal awareness of hypoglycemia; Vis imp, visually impaired; R, retinopathy.