Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

2,908 questions · 3,101 findings · 509 reviews

No studies found 571 · 18.4%GRADE not reported 358 · 11.5%Very low 723 · 23.3%Low 854 · 27.5%Moderate 489 · 15.8%High 106 · 3.4%

HFNC vs standard oxygen therapy

In‐hospital mortality (up to 90 days; included studies reported in‐hospital mortality, and mortality up to 28 days and up to ICU discharge) · adults in the ICU, requiring respiratory support

HFNC showed no clear difference in in‐hospital mortality (up to 90 days; included studies reported… compared with standard oxygen therapy (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

HFNC vs standard oxygen therapy

Adverse events Respiratory infection (pneumonia) Nasal mucosa or skin trauma · adults in the ICU, requiring respiratory support

HFNC showed no clear difference in adverse events Respiratory infection (pneumonia) Nasal mucosa or… compared with standard oxygen therapy (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

HFNC vs NIPPV or NIV

Treatment failure (escalation of respiratory therapy to NIV, NIPPV or invasive ventilation) Measured up to 28 days · adults in the ICU, requiring respiratory support

HFNC showed no clear difference in treatment failure (escalation of respiratory therapy to NIV, NIPPV… compared with NIPPV or NIV (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

HFNC vs NIPPV or NIV

In‐hospital mortality (up to 90 days; included studies reported in‐hospital mortality, and mortality up to 28 days and up to ICU discharge) · adults in the ICU, requiring respiratory support

HFNC showed no clear difference in in‐hospital mortality (up to 90 days; included studies reported… compared with NIPPV or NIV (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Beta‐blockers vs placebo or no treatment

Heart failure hospitalisation (RR) · patients with chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

It is very uncertain whether beta‐blockers changes heart failure hospitalisation (RR) compared with placebo or no treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) vs placebo or no treatment

Cardiovascular mortality · patients with chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) showed no clear difference in cardiovascular mortality (RR) compared with placebo or no treatment (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) vs placebo or no treatment

Heart failure hospitalisation (RR) · patients with chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) probably leads to lower heart failure hospitalisation (RR) compared with placebo or no treatment (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) vs placebo or no treatment

Hyperkalaemia · patients with chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) leads to higher hyperkalaemia compared with placebo or no treatment (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) vs placebo or no treatment

All‐cause mortality · patients with chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) showed no clear difference in all‐cause mortality compared with placebo or no treatment (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review