Acupuncture vs sham: Adverse effects (drop‐outs due to adverse effects4)
- Population
- people with episodic migraine
- Intervention
- Acupuncture
- Comparison
- sham
- Outcome
- Adverse effects (drop‐outs due to adverse effects4)
Acupuncture showed no clear difference in number of participants dropping out due to adverse effects compared with sham interventions (low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Acupuncture vs sham interventions Number of participants dropping out due to adverse effects · people with episodic migraine Acupuncture showed no clear difference in number of participants dropping out due to adverse effects compared with sham interventions (low certainty). Acupuncture for the prevention of episodic migraine (2016) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 2.84 [0.43, 18.71] | 7 studies · 931 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Acupuncture for the prevention of episodic migraine 2016 · 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 prophylactic drugs · people with episodic migraine · 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.