General comment:
The manuscript focuses on an important subject, of which little is known. It is correctly structured and its methodology is clearly stated.
It is understood that, due to the lack of evidence, it was not possible to comply with aspects initially raised, such as analyzes by age subgroups.

Specific comments:
- I suggest emphasizing that the degree of heterogeneity is high in the aspects that resulted (% time with nocturnal, severe hypoglycemia and with hyperglycemia> 10 mmol/l).
- I suggest using both the mmol/l and mg/dl values always.
- The paragraph between lines 29 to 45 on page 13 is repeated on pages 14 and 15. Delete repetition.
- I suggest comparing the results of this meta-analysis with the information available in adults. The results in adults are only mentioned when talking about CLS.
- I suggest adjusting the format of Table 1, Buckingham study (2 confusing columns when presenting the age ranges).
- It is not necessary to show the search strategies or the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, they can go in supplementary information or disappear.
- In Figure 1 it is not clear that 159 studies were subtracted in the duplicate elimination text box, it is impressive that they are the remaining studies.
- Figure 3 shows the same as Figure 2, it can be removed. Even, Figure 2 could be removed since the same content is shown in Figures 4 to 8.

The protocol is well established and the methodology is clear. The lack of enough data is because the few studies available, but the study still important. The authors modified the suggested modification by the reviewers.
My only comment is in the discussion section, page 14, lines 15-22 that refers time spend in hypoglycemia (<3.9 mmol/l, <70 mg/dl) but no unit is mentioned. It was minutes o percentage of time?