Antifungal prophylaxis vs no antifungal prophylaxis: Cryptococcal disease occurrence
Antifungal prophylaxis probably leads to lower cryptococcal disease occurrence compared with no antifungal prophylaxis (moderate certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Antifungal prophylaxis vs no antifungal prophylaxis Cryptococcal disease occurrence · people who are HIV‐positive Antifungal prophylaxis probably leads to lower cryptococcal disease occurrence compared with no antifungal prophylaxis (moderate certainty). Primary antifungal prophylaxis for cryptococcal disease in HIV‐positive people (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.29 [0.17, 0.49] | 7 studies · 5000 participants | Moderate |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary antifungal prophylaxis for cryptococcal disease in HIV‐positive people 2018 · 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.