Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

338 questions · 369 findings · 33 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 91 · 24.7%GRADE not reported 68 · 18.4%Very low 125 · 33.9%Low 49 · 13.3%Moderate 32 · 8.7%High 4 · 1.1%

Pulsed dye laser vs intense pulsed light therapy

Participant‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity · Participants with rosacea

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for rosacea 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 40 participants
Low

Pulsed dye laser vs intense pulsed light therapy

Proportion of participants with adverse event Pain as · Participants with rosacea

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for rosacea 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 40 participants
Low

Pulsed dye laser vs intense pulsed light therapy

Physician‐assessed improvement in rosacea severity ‐ not measured · Participants with 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

Pulsed dye laser vs intense pulsed light therapy

Assessment of erythema or telangiectasia · Participants with rosacea

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for rosacea 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 40 participants
Moderate

Pulsed dye laser vs intense pulsed light therapy

Lesion count ‐ not measured · Participants with 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

Pulsed dye laser vs intense pulsed light therapy

Time needed until improvement ‐ not measured · Participants with 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

Pulsed dye laser vs intense pulsed light therapy

Duration of remission ‐ not measured · Participants with 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

Low‐level laser therapy vs Placebo or no active treatment

Oral mucositis (any severity) · Patients with cancer receiving radiotherapy, chemotherapy or targeted therapies

Laser (low level) showed no clear difference in oral mucositis (any severity) compared with placebo/sham/no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for preventing oral mucositis for patients with cancer receiving treatment 2011 · Cochrane All outcomes
Median 28 days
RR 0.91 [0.71, 1.17]
5 studies · 234 participants
GRADE not reported

Low‐level laser therapy vs Placebo or no active treatment

Oral mucositis (moderate to severe) · Patients with cancer receiving radiotherapy, chemotherapy or targeted therapies

Laser (low level) showed no clear difference in oral mucositis (moderate to severe) compared with placebo/sham/no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for preventing oral mucositis for patients with cancer receiving treatment 2011 · Cochrane All outcomes
Median 28 days
RR 0.64 [0.38, 1.08]
2 studies
GRADE not reported

Low‐level laser therapy vs Povidone

Oral mucositis (moderate to severe) · Patients with cancer receiving radiotherapy, chemotherapy or targeted therapies

Laser (low level) led to lower oral mucositis (moderate to severe) compared with povidone; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for preventing oral mucositis for patients with cancer receiving treatment 2011 · Cochrane All outcomes
Median 28 days
RR 0.29 [0.16, 0.54]
1 study · 50 participants
GRADE not reported

Low‐level laser therapy vs Placebo or no active treatment

Oral mucositis (severe) · Patients with cancer receiving radiotherapy, chemotherapy or targeted therapies

Laser (low level) led to lower oral mucositis (severe) compared with placebo/sham/no treatment; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for preventing oral mucositis for patients with cancer receiving treatment 2011 · Cochrane All outcomes
Median 28 days
RR 0.2 [0.06, 0.62]
2 studies
GRADE not reported

Low‐level laser therapy vs Povidone

Oral mucositis (severe) · Patients with cancer receiving radiotherapy, chemotherapy or targeted therapies

Laser (low level) led to lower oral mucositis (severe) compared with povidone; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for preventing oral mucositis for patients with cancer receiving treatment 2011 · Cochrane All outcomes
Median 28 days
RR 0.02 [0, 0.31]
1 study · 50 participants
GRADE not reported

Transmyocardial laser revascularization vs medical treatment

Angina reduction ‐ NYHA scale Decrease in two angina classes or more · patients with refractory angina

Transmyocardial laser revascularization may leads to higher angina reduction Decrease in two angina classes or more compared with medical treatment (low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Transmyocardial laser revascularization versus medical therapy for refractory angina 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 4.63 [3.43, 6.25]
7 studies · 1051 participants
Low
Transmyocardial laser revascularization versus medical therapy for refractory angina 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 68.32 [7.95, 587.38]
2 studies · 128 participants
Moderate

Transmyocardial laser revascularization vs medical treatment

Angina reduction ‐ CCS score Decrease in two angina classes or more · patients with refractory angina

Transmyocardial laser revascularization may leads to higher angina reduction ‐ CCS score Decrease in two angina classes or more compared with medical treatment (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Transmyocardial laser revascularization versus medical therapy for refractory angina 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 3.95 [2.9, 5.39]
5 studies · 923 participants
Low

Transmyocardial laser revascularization vs medical treatment

Overall mortality · patients with refractory angina

Transmyocardial laser revascularization showed no clear difference in overall mortality compared with medical treatment (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Transmyocardial laser revascularization versus medical therapy for refractory angina 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 1.12 [0.77, 1.63]
7 studies · 1053 participants
High

Transmyocardial laser revascularization vs medical treatment

Early postoperative mortality Deaths in the 30 days after surgery · patients with refractory angina

Transmyocardial laser revascularization showed no clear difference in early postoperative mortality Deaths in the 30 days after surgery compared with medical treatment (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Transmyocardial laser revascularization versus medical therapy for refractory angina 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 1.19 [0.63, 2.24]
6 studies · 967 participants
High

Transmyocardial laser revascularization vs medical treatment

Exercise tolerance Minutes · patients with refractory angina

1 finding from 1 review

Transmyocardial laser revascularization versus medical therapy for refractory angina 2015 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 129 participants
Moderate

Fluorides combined with CPP-ACP vs Fluorides alone (monotherapy)

Laser fluorescence (LF) change · Patients with early caries lesions in permanent teeth (non-fluoridated water area)

For occlusal early caries lesions, adding CPP-ACP to fluorides produced significantly greater laser-fluorescence improvement than fluorides alone (favors the combination); not GRADE-rated.

2 findings from 1 review

Efficacy of fluorides and CPP-ACP vs fluorides monotherapy on early caries lesions: A systematic review and… 2018 All outcomes
Post-treatment (3-12 weeks) · In vivo clinical trial (human oral cavity; occlusal early caries lesions) · Location of lesions: occlusal surfaces
MD -21.02 [-27.94, -14.10]
3 studies
GRADE not reported
Efficacy of fluorides and CPP-ACP vs fluorides monotherapy on early caries lesions: A systematic review and… 2018 All outcomes
Post-treatment (12-24 weeks) · In vivo clinical trial (human oral cavity; smooth-surface early caries lesions) · Location of lesions: smooth surfaces
MD -13.90 [-39.25, 11.46]
4 studies
GRADE not reported

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs foam sclerotherapy

Long‐term recurrence (> 5 years) · people with GSV incompetence

It is very uncertain whether endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) changes long‐term recurrence (> 5 years) compared with ultrasound‐guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 1.08 [0.4, 2.87]
2 studies · 418 participants
Very low

Endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) vs foam sclerotherapy

Complications (up to 8 years) · people with GSV incompetence

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for great saphenous vein incompetence 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
Very low