Ventilation tubes vs no treatment: Hearing ‐ return to normal *Ventilation tubes versus laser myringotomy (6 to 12 months ‐ medium‐term) Adjusted for non‐independence of within‐individual measurements Assumed ICC of 0.5 № of participants: 132 (2 RCTs)
- Population
- children aged 6 months to 12 years with otitis media with effusion (OME)
- Intervention
- Ventilation tubes
- Comparison
- no treatment
- Outcome
- Hearing ‐ return to normal *Ventilation tubes versus laser myringotomy (6 to 12 months ‐ medium‐term) Adjusted for non‐independence of within‐individual measurements Assumed ICC of 0.5 № of participants: 132 (2 RCTs)
It is very uncertain whether ventilation tubes changes hearing ‐ return to normal hearing Randomised by ear: normal defined… compared with no treatment (very low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Ventilation tubes vs no treatment Hearing ‐ return to normal hearing Randomised by ear: normal defined as < 15 dB Assumed CC = 0.5 · children aged 6 months to 12 years with OME It is very uncertain whether ventilation tubes changes hearing ‐ return to normal hearing Randomised by ear: normal defined… compared with no treatment (very low certainty). Ventilation tubes (grommets) for otitis media with effusion (OME) in children (2023) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | OR 1.13 [0.46, 2.74] | Not reported | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ventilation tubes (grommets) for otitis media with effusion (OME) in children 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | Not extracted | Not assessed |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Ventilation tubes vs myringotomy · children aged 6 months to 12 years with otitis media with effusion (OME) · 1 review
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.