Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) in combination with SLT or other devices vs clinical judgement or usual care: Proportion of patients receiving platelets
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) in… showed no clear difference in proportion of patients receiving platelets compared with clinical judgement or usual care (low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) in combination with SLT or other devices vs clinical judgement or usual care Proportion of patients receiving platelets · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) in… showed no clear difference in proportion of patients receiving platelets compared with clinical judgement or usual care (low certainty). Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.75 [0.47, 1.2] | 3 studies · 307 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care in adults or children with… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.