Question · asked by 1 review
Rebamipide (systemic; 300 mg daily) vs placebo: Global aphthae count and pain score
- Population
- People with Behcet's disease with a history of recurrent oral aphthous-type (RAS-type) ulcers diagnosed clinically; primary care
- Intervention
- Rebamipide (systemic; 300 mg daily)
- Comparison
- placebo
- Outcome
- Global aphthae count and pain score
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Rebamipide (systemic; 300 mg daily) vs Placebo Global aphthae count and pain score · People with Behcet's disease with a history of recurrent oral aphthous-type (RAS-type) ulcers diagnosed clinically;… Interventions for managing oral ulcers in Behçet's disease (2014) · Cochrane All outcomes | Matsuda 2003 (rebamipide 300 mg daily vs placebo, 35 patients; high risk of reporting bias; concomitant treatments): authors stated that rebamipide improved the global evaluation aphthae count and global evaluation… | 1 study · 35 participants | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interventions for managing oral ulcers in Behçet's disease 2014 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2013-10 | Not listed | 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.