Gap finder
Search review questions
Each row is one question a systematic review asked: who, what, compared with what, and which outcome, with the effect it found and how certain that is. Words match anywhere in the field.
1,558 questions in 115 reviews · Vascular
current versionsNo studies 346 · 22.2%Ungraded 90 · 5.8%Very low 281 · 18%Low 477 · 30.6%Moderate 313 · 20.1%High 51 · 3.3%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
| Question | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Cilostazol vs placebo Amputation (number of cases) · intermittent claudication Cilostazol for intermittent claudication (2021) · Cochrane | OR 0.16 [0.01, 4.07] | 1 study · 516 participants | Very low |
Cilostazol vs placebo Adverse event related to study medication ‐ headache (number of cases) · intermittent claudication Cilostazol for intermittent claudication (2021) · Cochrane | OR 2.83 [2.26, 3.55] | 8 studies · 2584 participants | Moderate |
Cilostazol vs placebo Cardiovascular event (number of cases) · intermittent claudication Cilostazol for intermittent claudication (2021) · Cochrane | OR 1.5 [0.51, 4.47] | 2 studies · 692 participants | Low |
Cilostazol vs pentoxifylline Initial claudication distance (change in meters) · intermittent claudication Cilostazol for intermittent claudication (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 417 participants | Low |
Cilostazol vs pentoxifylline Quality of life (change in points, SF‐36, WIQ) · intermittent claudication Cilostazol for intermittent claudication (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 317 participants | Very low |
Compression stockings vs no compression stockings Symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT) · passengers on a long haul flight (more than 4 hours) Compression stockings for preventing deep vein thrombosis in airline passengers (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 9 studies · 2821 participants | Ungraded |
Compression stockings vs no compression stockings Symptomless DVT · passengers on a long haul flight (more than 4 hours) Compression stockings for preventing deep vein thrombosis in airline passengers (2021) · Cochrane | OR 0.1 [0.04, 0.25] | 9 studies · 2637 participants | High |
Compression stockings vs no compression stockings Pulmonary embolism (PE) · passengers on a long haul flight (more than 4 hours) Compression stockings for preventing deep vein thrombosis in airline passengers (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 9 studies · 2821 participants | Ungraded |
Compression stockings vs no compression stockings Death · passengers on a long haul flight (more than 4 hours) Compression stockings for preventing deep vein thrombosis in airline passengers (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 9 studies · 2821 participants | Ungraded |
Compression stockings vs no compression stockings Superficial vein thrombosis · passengers on a long haul flight (more than 4 hours) Compression stockings for preventing deep vein thrombosis in airline passengers (2021) · Cochrane | OR 0.45 [0.18, 1.13] | 8 studies · 1804 participants | Moderate |
Compression stockings vs no compression stockings Oedema · passengers on a long haul flight (more than 4 hours) Compression stockings for preventing deep vein thrombosis in airline passengers (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 6 studies · 1246 participants | Low |
Compression stockings vs no compression stockings Adverse effects arising from the use of compression stockings · passengers on a long haul flight (more than 4 hours) Compression stockings for preventing deep vein thrombosis in airline passengers (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 1182 participants | Ungraded |
Thrombolytic therapy vs heparin: primary outcome measures Death from all causes (duration of · people with acute PE Thrombolytic therapy for pulmonary embolism (2021) · Cochrane | OR 0.58 [0.38, 0.88] | 19 studies · 2319 participants | Low |
Thrombolytic therapy vs heparin: primary outcome measures Recurrence of pulmonary emboli (duration of · people with acute PE Thrombolytic therapy for pulmonary embolism (2021) · Cochrane | OR 0.54 [0.32, 0.91] | 12 studies · 2050 participants | Low |
Thrombolytic therapy vs heparin: primary outcome measures Major haemorrhagic events (duration of · people with acute PE Thrombolytic therapy for pulmonary embolism (2021) · Cochrane | OR 2.84 [1.92, 4.2] | 15 studies · 2101 participants | Moderate |
Thrombolytic therapy vs heparin: primary outcome measures Minor haemorrhagic events (duration of · people with acute PE Thrombolytic therapy for pulmonary embolism (2021) · Cochrane | OR 2.97 [1.66, 5.3] | 13 studies · 1757 participants | Low |
Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs radiofrequency ablation (RFA) Technical success (< 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 0.98 [0.41, 2.38] | 5 studies · 780 participants | Moderate |
Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) Long‐term recurrence (> 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 1.08 [0.4, 2.87] | 2 studies · 418 participants | Very low |
Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) Complications (up to 8 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Very low |
Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) QoL (up to 8 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Moderate |
Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) Technical success (< 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 2.31 [1.27, 4.23] | 6 studies · 1051 participants | Low |
Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) Technical success (> 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 0.93 [0.57, 1.5] | 5 studies · 874 participants | Low |
Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) Recurrence (< 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 0.78 [0.47, 1.29] | 7 studies · 1459 participants | Moderate |
Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) Long‐term recurrence (> 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 1.09 [0.68, 1.76] | 7 studies · 1267 participants | Moderate |
Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) Complications (up to 8 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Very low |
Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) QoL (up to 8 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Moderate |
Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) Technical success (< 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 1.76 [0.06, 54.15] | 3 studies · 435 participants | Low |
Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs radiofrequency ablation (RFA) Technical success (> 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 0.85 [0.3, 2.41] | 1 study · 291 participants | Low |
Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) Technical success (> 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) Recurrence (< 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 1 [0.21, 4.81] | 3 studies · 389 participants | Low |
Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) Long‐term recurrence (≥ 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) Complications (up to 1 year) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Very low |
Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs mechanochemical ablation (MOCA) QoL (AVVQ, EQ‐5D) (up to 1 year) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Moderate |
Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) Technical success (< 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 5.71 [0.64, 50.81] | 2 studies · 318 participants | Low |
Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) Technical success (> 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 0.88 [0.29, 2.69] | 1 study · 289 participants | Low |
Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) Recurrence (< 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 0.93 [0.58, 1.51] | 4 studies · 546 participants | Moderate |
Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) Long‐term recurrence (> 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 0.41 [0.22, 0.75] | 1 study · 289 participants | Low |
Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) Complications (up to 8 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Very low |
Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs radiofrequency ablation (RFA) Recurrence (< 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 1.53 [0.78, 2.99] | 1 study · 291 participants | Low |
Radiofrequency ablation (RFA) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) QoL (up to 8 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Moderate |
Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) Technical success (< 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 0.32 [0.11, 0.94] | 4 studies · 954 participants | Low |
Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) Technical success (> 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 0.09 [0.03, 0.3] | 3 studies · 525 participants | Moderate |
Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) Recurrence (< 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 1.81 [0.87, 3.77] | 3 studies · 822 participants | Low |
Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) Long‐term recurrence (≥ 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 1.24 [0.57, 2.71] | 3 studies · 639 participants | Low |
Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) Complications (up to 8 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 639 participants | Very low |
Ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) vs SFJ ligation and stripping (HL/S) QoL (up to 8 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 930 participants | Moderate |
Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs radiofrequency ablation (RFA) Long‐term recurrence (> 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 2.77 [1.52, 5.06] | 1 study · 291 participants | Low |
Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs radiofrequency ablation (RFA) Complications (up to 8 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Very low |
Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs radiofrequency ablation (RFA) QoL (up to 8 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Moderate |
Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) Technical success (< 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence (2021) · Cochrane | OR 6.13 [0.98, 38.27] | 3 studies · 588 participants | Low |