EMG biofeedback vs laxative alone: Major clinical improvement at six months
EMG biofeedback may leads to higher major clinical improvement at six months compared with laxative (low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
EMG biofeedback vs laxative Major clinical improvement at six months · Patients with pelvic floor dyssynergia and chronic constipation EMG biofeedback may leads to higher major clinical improvement at six months compared with laxative (low certainty). Biofeedback for treatment of chronic idiopathic constipation in adults (2014) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 3.65 [2.17, 6.13] | 1 study · 109 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Biofeedback for treatment of chronic idiopathic constipation in adults 2014 · 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.