Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

31 questions · 31 findings · 4 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 12 · 38.7%GRADE not reported 12 · 38.7%Very low 1 · 3.2%Low 6 · 19.4%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Ciclosporin ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% vs artificial tears

Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity ‐ not measured · Participants with ocular rosacea

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for rosacea 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Ciclosporin ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% vs artificial tears

Proportion of participants with adverse event · Participants with ocular rosacea

Ciclosporin ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% showed no clear difference in proportion of participants with adverse event compared with artificial tears (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for rosacea 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 2.32 [0.1, 53.42]
1 study · 37 participants
Low

Ciclosporin ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% vs artificial tears

Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity Schirmer score · Participants with ocular rosacea

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for rosacea 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 37 participants
Low

Ciclosporin ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% vs artificial tears

Assessment of erythema or telangiectasia ‐ not measured · Participants with ocular rosacea

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for rosacea 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Ciclosporin ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% vs artificial tears

Lesion count ‐ not measured · Participants with ocular rosacea

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for rosacea 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Ciclosporin ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% vs artificial tears

Time needed until improvement of the skin lesions · Participants with ocular rosacea

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for rosacea 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Ciclosporin ophthalmic emulsion 0.05% vs artificial tears

Duration of remission ‐ not measured · Participants with ocular rosacea

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for rosacea 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Any topical or systemic intervention (topical/systemic steroids, ciclosporin, tacrolimus, retinoids, anti-malarials, biologics, phototherapy, surgery) vs Placebo, no treatment, another active intervention, or a different dose of the same intervention

Eating a normally varied diet · People of any age with erosive lichen planus affecting the oral, anogenital, and/or oesophageal regions

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for erosive lichen planus affecting mucosal sites 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
No studies reported this outcome.
0 studies
No studies found

Any topical or systemic intervention (topical/systemic steroids, ciclosporin, tacrolimus, retinoids, anti-malarials, biologics, phototherapy, surgery) vs Placebo, no treatment, another active intervention, or a different dose of the same intervention

Restoration of sexual activity · People of any age with erosive lichen planus affecting the oral, anogenital, and/or oesophageal regions

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for erosive lichen planus affecting mucosal sites 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
None of the included studies assessed the effectiveness of treatments of genital ELP; thus, this outcome was not reported.
0 studies
No studies found

Any topical or systemic intervention (topical/systemic steroids, ciclosporin, tacrolimus, retinoids, anti-malarials, biologics, phototherapy, surgery) vs Placebo, no treatment, another active intervention, or a different dose of the same intervention

Reduction in number of flares · People of any age with erosive lichen planus affecting the oral, anogenital, and/or oesophageal regions

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for erosive lichen planus affecting mucosal sites 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
No studies reported this outcome.
0 studies
No studies found

Any topical or systemic intervention (topical/systemic steroids, ciclosporin, tacrolimus, retinoids, anti-malarials, biologics, phototherapy, surgery) vs Placebo, no treatment, another active intervention, or a different dose of the same intervention

Reduction in severity of flares · People of any age with erosive lichen planus affecting the oral, anogenital, and/or oesophageal regions

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for erosive lichen planus affecting mucosal sites 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
No studies reported this outcome.
0 studies
No studies found