Second‐generation endometrial ablation vs first‐generation endometrial ablation: Proportion given local anaesthesia (%)
It is very uncertain whether overall analyses: second‐generation endometrial ablation changes proportion given local anaesthesia (%) compared with first‐generation endometrial ablation (very low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Overall analyses: second‐generation endometrial ablation vs first‐generation endometrial ablation Proportion given local anaesthesia (%) · heavy menstrual bleeding It is very uncertain whether overall analyses: second‐generation endometrial ablation changes proportion given local anaesthesia (%) compared with first‐generation endometrial ablation (very low certainty). Endometrial resection and ablation techniques for heavy menstrual bleeding (2019) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 2.78 [1.76, 4.4] | 6 studies · 1434 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Endometrial resection and ablation techniques for heavy menstrual bleeding 2019 · 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.