H2 receptor antagonists vs placebo or no prophylaxis: Blood transfusion
H2 receptor antagonists probably leads to lower number of participants requiring blood transfusions compared with placebo or no prophylaxis (moderate certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
H2 receptor antagonists vs placebo or no prophylaxis Number of participants requiring blood transfusions · people admitted to intensive care units H2 receptor antagonists probably leads to lower number of participants requiring blood transfusions compared with placebo or no prophylaxis (moderate certainty). Interventions for preventing upper gastrointestinal bleeding in people admitted to intensive care units (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.58 [0.36, 0.95] | 7 studies · 655 participants | Moderate |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interventions for preventing upper gastrointestinal bleeding in people admitted to intensive care units 2018 · 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.