Question · asked by 1 review
Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone: VTE‐related mortality4
- Population
- people with unprovoked VTE
- Intervention
- Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning
- Comparison
- standard testing alone
- Outcome
- VTE‐related mortality4
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
What each review found
Current versions onlyNo studies found 3 · 100%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone VTE‐related mortality4 · people with unprovoked VTE The review found no eligible studies for this question. Effect of testing for cancer on cancer‐ or venous thromboembolism (VTE)‐related mortality and morbidity in… (2021) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | Not reported | No studies found |
Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone VTE‐related mortality4 · people with unprovoked VTE The review found no eligible studies for this question. Effect of testing for cancer on cancer‐ or venous thromboembolism (VTE)‐related mortality and morbidity in… (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD010837.PUB4, superseded | no estimate extracted | Not reported | No studies found |
Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone VTE‐related mortality4 · people with unprovoked VTE The review found no eligible studies for this question. Effect of testing for cancer on cancer‐ or venous thromboembolism (VTE)‐related mortality and morbidity in… (2017) · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyearlier version CD010837.PUB3, superseded | no estimate extracted | Not reported | No studies found |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Effect of testing for cancer on cancer‐ or venous thromboembolism (VTE)‐related mortality and morbidity in people with unprovoked VTE 2021 · 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.