Summary of findings ‐ nebulisers for delivering tobramycin: conventional systems vs VMT: Adverse events
- Population
- adults and children with cystic fibrosis
- Intervention
- Summary of findings ‐ nebulisers for delivering tobramycin: conventional systems
- Comparison
- VMT
- Outcome
- Adverse events
It is very uncertain whether summary of findings ‐ nebulisers for delivering tobramycin:… changes adverse events compared with VMT (very low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Summary of findings ‐ nebulisers for delivering tobramycin: conventional systems vs VMT Adverse events · children and adults with cystic fibrosis It is very uncertain whether summary of findings ‐ nebulisers for delivering tobramycin:… changes adverse events compared with VMT (very low certainty). Nebuliser systems for drug delivery in cystic fibrosis (2023) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.78 [0.37, 1.64] | 2 studies · 60 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nebuliser systems for drug delivery in cystic fibrosis 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | Not extracted | Not assessed |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Summary of findings ‐ nebulisers for delivering tobramycin: conventional systems vs VMT and AAD · children aged 6 ‐ 18 with cystic fibrosis · 1 review
- Summary of findings ‐ nebulisers for delivering tobramycin: conventional systems vs AAD · adults and children with cystic fibrosis · 1 review
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.