Presence of

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Hyperlipidemia at baseline was associated with a 19% higher risk of persistently poor glycemic control (HbA1c >9%) over the study period (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.34).

Effect: decline; RR: 1.19; CI: 95% CI: 1.06, 1.34

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92

Presence of microvascular complications at baseline reduced the probability of achieving guideline-recommended glycemic control by 30% (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.53-0.92), indicating that patients with exis

Effect: decline; RR: 0.70; CI: 95% CI: 0.53-0.92