Aims: We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) assessing separately and together the effect of the three distinct categories of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems (adjunctive, non‐adjunctive and intermittently‐scanned CGM [isCGM]), compared with traditional capillary glucose monitoring, on HbA1c and CGM metrics.Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane Central register of clinical trials were searched. Inclusion criteria were as follows: randomised controlled trials; participants with type 1 diabetes of any age and insulin regimen; investigating CGM and isCGM compared with traditional capillary glucose monitoring; and reporting glycaemic outcomes of HbA1c and/or time‐in‐range (TIR). Glycaemic outcomes were extracted post‐intervention and expressed as mean differences and 95%CIs between treatment and comparator groups. Results were pooled using a random‐effects meta‐analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Rob2 tool.Results: This systematic review was conducted between January and April 2021; it included 22 RCTs (15 adjunctive, 5 non‐adjunctive, and 2 isCGM)). The overall analysis of the pooled three categories showed a statistically significant absolute improvement in HbA1c percentage points (mean difference (95% CI): −0.22% [−0.31 to −0.14], I² = 79%) for intervention compared with comparator and was strongest for adjunctive CGM (−0.26% [−0.36, −0.16]). Overall TIR (absolute change) increased by 5.4% (3.5 to 7.2), I² = 71% for CGM intervention compared with comparator and was strongest with non‐adjunctive CGM (6.0% [2.3, 9.7]).Conclusions: For individuals with T1D, use of CGM was beneficial for impacting glycaemic outcomes including HbA1c, TIR and time‐below‐range (TBR). Glycaemic improvement appeared greater for TIR for newer non‐adjunctive CGM technology.

Cooking is frequently associated with a healthier diet, however few youth cooking intervention studies have used control groups or follow-ups. Additionally, although cooking is associated with better mental well-being among adolescents, this has not been examined experimentally. This randomised controlled trial investigated whether a five-day intensive holiday cooking program, followed by six weeks of weekly meal kits with Facebook support groups, affected the cooking-related outcomes, diet quality and mental well-being among adolescents, with a 12-month follow-up. Adolescents aged 12–15 years (intervention: n = 91, 60% female; control: n = 27, 78% female) completed baseline, post-intervention and 12-month follow-up anthropometric measures, and questionnaire measures of mental well-being, diet quality and cooking attitudes, self-efficacy and behaviours. The intervention group’s post-intervention outcomes improved significantly more for mental well-being, diet quality, helping make dinner, cooking self-efficacy and positive cooking attitude, however body mass index (BMI) z-scores also increased. Differences were maintained at 12 months for self-efficacy only. Group interviews showed that participants’ cooking behaviours were strongly influenced by family factors. Adolescent cooking interventions may have many short-term benefits, however cooking self-efficacy appears most responsive and stable over time. Effects on BMI need further investigation. Family factors influence whether and what adolescents cook post-intervention.

Background: Cooking more frequently is associated with a healthier diet. However, reported decreases in adolescents’ cooking opportunities may contribute