Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

433 questions · 520 findings · 26 reviews

No studies found 158 · 30.4%GRADE not reported 136 · 26.2%Very low 123 · 23.7%Low 58 · 11.2%Moderate 37 · 7.1%High 8 · 1.5%

Extracorporeal shockwave therapy vs sham

Treatment‐related adverse effects · men with Peyronie's disease (palpable plaque or pain)

It is very uncertain whether extracorporeal shock wave treatment (ESWT) changes treatment‐related adverse effects compared with sham (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Extracorporeal shockwave therapy vs sham

Treatment discontinuation · men with Peyronie's disease (palpable plaque or pain)

It is very uncertain whether extracorporeal shock wave treatment (ESWT) changes discontinuation from treatment compared with sham (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Potassium paraaminobenzoate vs placebo

Treatment discontinuation · men with acute (maximum of 12 months) Peyronie's disease with no prior treatment and no evidence of calcified plaques (pain during…

It is very uncertain whether potassium paraaminobenzoate changes discontinuation from treatment compared with placebo (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Penile traction therapy vs no treatment (short‐term)

Treatment discontinuation · men with Peyronie's disease (diagnosis of disease: varying, penile curvature: at least 30 degrees)

It is very uncertain whether penile traction therapy changes discontinuation from treatment compared with no treatment (short‐term) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Light-emitting diode (LED) photobiomodulation vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Total number of orthodontic appliance adjustment appointments during treatment · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing fixed orthodontic appliance treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Light vibrational forces (LVF) vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Rate of orthodontic tooth movement with removable orthodontic aligners · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed or removable appliances

Light vibrational forces (LVF) showed no clear difference in rate of orthodontic tooth movement with removable orthodontic aligners compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (placebo or no adjunct); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Light-emitting diode (LED) photobiomodulation vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Rate of orthodontic tooth movement during space closure stage (maxillary canine distalisation), mm/day · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing fixed orthodontic appliance treatment

It is very uncertain whether light-emitting diode (LED) photobiomodulation changes rate of orthodontic tooth movement during space closure stage… compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Low‐level laser therapy vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Orthodontically-induced inflammatory root resorption (OIIRR) during molar intrusion · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing fixed orthodontic appliance treatment
1 finding from 1 review

Light vibrational forces (LVF) vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Orthodontic tooth movement (OTM) during alignment stage · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed or removable appliances

Light vibrational forces (LVF) showed no clear difference in orthodontic tooth movement (OTM) during alignment stage (reduction… compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (placebo or no adjunct) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Light vibrational forces (LVF) vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Harms: non-serious adverse effects (headache, discomfort, loosening of temporary anchorage devices) · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed or removable appliances

Light vibrational forces (LVF) showed no clear difference in harms: non-serious adverse effects (headache, discomfort, loosening… compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (placebo or no adjunct); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Light vibrational forces (LVF) vs Conventional orthodontic appliance treatment

Overall treatment time wearing orthodontic appliances · Adolescents and adults with malocclusion undergoing orthodontic treatment with fixed or removable appliances

Light vibrational forces (LVF) showed no clear difference in duration of orthodontic treatment compared with conventional orthodontic appliance treatment (placebo or no adjunct) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review