Fibrates vs control: Fatal or nonfatal stroke
Fibrates showed no clear difference in stroke (ischaemic or haemorrhagic, non‐fatal or fatal) during the… compared with control (low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Fibrates vs control Stroke (ischaemic or haemorrhagic, non‐fatal or fatal) during the treatment and scheduled · People with previous clinical manifestations of cardiovascular disease, transient ischaemic attack, or stroke Fibrates showed no clear difference in stroke (ischaemic or haemorrhagic, non‐fatal or fatal) during the… compared with control (low certainty). Fibrates for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease and stroke (2015) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.94 [0.78, 1.14] | 3 studies · 7189 participants | Low |
Fibrates vs control Stroke (ischaemic or haemorrhagic, non‐fatal or fatal) during the treatment and scheduled · People with previous clinical manifestations of cardiovascular disease, transient ischaemic attack, or stroke Fibrates showed no clear difference in stroke (ischaemic or haemorrhagic, non‐fatal or fatal) during the… compared with control (low certainty). Fibrates for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease and stroke (2015) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 1.03 [0.91, 1.16] | 6 studies · 11719 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fibrates for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease and stroke 2015 · 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.