Intervention vs usual care: Exacerbations (number of people experiencing ≥ 1 exacerbations)
It is very uncertain whether intervention changes exacerbations ‐ number of people experiencing one or more  compared with usual care (very low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Intervention vs usual care Exacerbations ‐ number of people experiencing one or more  · COPD and at least one other long‐term condition It is very uncertain whether intervention changes exacerbations ‐ number of people experiencing one or more  compared with usual care (very low certainty). Tailored or adapted interventions for adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and at least one… (2021) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | OR 1.09 [0.75, 1.57] | 1 study · 470 participants | Very low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tailored or adapted interventions for adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and at least one other long‐term condition: a… 2021 · 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.