Summary of findings table ‐ Off‐midline closure vs conventional midline closure: Proportion of wounds healed
It is very uncertain whether summary of findings table ‐ Off‐midline closure changes proportion of wounds healed compared with conventional midline closure (very low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Summary of findings table ‐ Off‐midline closure vs conventional midline closure Proportion of wounds healed · pilonidal sinus It is very uncertain whether summary of findings table ‐ Off‐midline closure changes proportion of wounds healed compared with conventional midline closure (very low certainty). Midline and off‐midline wound closure methods after surgical treatment for pilonidal sinus (2024) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 1.13 [0.92, 1.39] | 2 studies · 207 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Midline and off‐midline wound closure methods after surgical treatment for pilonidal sinus 2024 · 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.