Question · asked by 1 review
Extracorporeal shockwave therapy vs sham: Adverse events
- Population
- people with postburn pruritus
- Intervention
- Extracorporeal shockwave therapy
- Comparison
- sham
- Outcome
- Adverse events
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Extracorporeal shock wave therapy vs sham Adverse events · people with postburn pruritus The review found no eligible studies for this question. Interventions for postburn pruritus (2024) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | Not reported | No studies found |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interventions for postburn pruritus 2024 · 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.
- Extracorporeal shockwave therapy vs control procedure · participants with chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome · 1 review
- Extracorporeal shockwave therapy vs control · adolescents and adults with acute fractures in tibia and femur · 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.