Question · asked by 1 review
Acupuncture vs non‐acupuncture: Adverse events
- Population
- patients with fibromyalgia
- Intervention
- Acupuncture
- Comparison
- non‐acupuncture
- Outcome
- Adverse events
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Acupuncture vs non‐acupuncture Adverse events · patients with fibromyalgia Acupuncture for treating fibromyalgia (2013) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 13 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Acupuncture for treating fibromyalgia 2013 · 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.
- Acupuncture vs sham control · Patients with idiopathic dysgeusia and hypogeusia · 1 review
- Acupuncture vs medical treatment · treating chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome · 1 review
- Acupuncture vs sham · participants with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome · 1 review
- Acupuncture vs sham · Adults with dry mouth due to radiotherapy (head and neck cancer) or Sjogren's Syndrome · 1 review
- Acupuncture vs relaxation · polycystic ovarian syndrome · 1 review
- Acupuncture vs sham · polycystic ovarian syndrome · 1 review
- Acupuncture vs oral corticosteroid · carpal tunnel syndrome · 1 review
- Acupuncture vs placebo or sham acupuncture · carpal tunnel syndrome · 1 review
- Acupuncture vs sham · symptomatic gastroparesis · 1 review
- Acupuncture vs ibuprofen · carpal tunnel syndrome · 1 review
- Acupuncture vs clomiphene · polycystic ovarian syndrome · 1 review
- Acupuncture vs control · spatial neglect or inattention following stroke and other adult‐acquired non‐progressive… · 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.