BoNT‐A vs sham: Observational gait analysis (improvement)
BoNT‐A probably leads to higher observational gait analysis (improvement) compared with placebo or sham (moderate certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
BoNT‐A vs placebo or sham Observational gait analysis (improvement) · children with CP BoNT‐A probably leads to higher observational gait analysis (improvement) compared with placebo or sham (moderate certainty). Botulinum toxin type A in the treatment of lower limb spasticity in children with cerebral palsy (2019) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 1.66 [1.16, 2.37] | 4 studies · 261 participants | Moderate |
BoNT‐A vs placebo or sham Observational gait analysis (improvement) · children with CP BoNT‐A probably leads to higher observational gait analysis (improvement) compared with placebo or sham (moderate certainty). Botulinum toxin type A in the treatment of lower limb spasticity in children with cerebral palsy (2019) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 1.9 [1.32, 2.74] | 3 studies · 248 participants | Moderate |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Botulinum toxin type A in the treatment of lower limb spasticity in children with cerebral palsy 2019 · 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.