Question · asked by 1 review
Cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES) vs sham: QoL
- Population
- adults with chronic pain
- Intervention
- Cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES)
- Comparison
- sham
- Outcome
- QoL
What each review found
Current versions onlyNo studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 2 · 100%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES) vs sham Quality of life (0 to < 1 week postintervention) measured using Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire · adults with chronic pain Non‐invasive brain stimulation techniques for chronic pain (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD008208.PUB4, superseded | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 36 participants | Very low |
Cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES) vs sham Quality of life (0 to < 1 week postintervention) measured using Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire · adults with chronic pain Non‐invasive brain stimulation techniques for chronic pain (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 36 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Non‐invasive brain stimulation techniques for chronic pain 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | Not extracted | Not assessed |
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.