Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

4,410 questions · 8,901 findings · 1,091 reviews

No studies found 1,687 · 19%GRADE not reported 1,469 · 16.5%Very low 1,969 · 22.1%Low 2,060 · 23.1%Moderate 1,302 · 14.6%High 414 · 4.7%

Ranked among the 5,000 newest matching findings; add words or filters to narrow the search.

Low vs higher dose target of rapamycin inhibitor (TOR‐ I): secondary outcomes

Acne/rash · primary immunosuppression in kidney transplant recipients

Low showed no clear difference in acne/rash compared with higher dose target of rapamycin inhibitor (TOR‐ I): secondary outcomes (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Low vs higher dose target of rapamycin inhibitor (TOR‐ I): secondary outcomes

Hypercholesterolaemia · primary immunosuppression in kidney transplant recipients

Low probably leads to lower hypercholesterolaemia compared with higher dose target of rapamycin inhibitor (TOR‐ I): secondary outcomes (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Low vs higher dose target of rapamycin inhibitor (TOR‐ I): secondary outcomes

Anaemia · primary immunosuppression in kidney transplant recipients

Low may leads to lower anaemia compared with higher dose target of rapamycin inhibitor (TOR‐ I): secondary outcomes (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Low vs higher dose target of rapamycin inhibitor (TOR‐ I): secondary outcomes

Thrombocytopenia · primary immunosuppression in kidney transplant recipients

Low may leads to lower thrombocytopenia compared with higher dose target of rapamycin inhibitor (TOR‐ I): secondary outcomes (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Change in endothelial function: Change in flow‐mediated dilatation of brachial artery (%) · children with familial hypercholesterolemia
1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Any depression Multiple measures used. CES‐D (Blanchard 1996;McCorkle 2007). POMS Depression subscale (Bultz 2000). HADS‐D (Nicolaisen 2018; Robertson 2016). Higher scores indicate higher levels of depression. Folllow‐up: Three to six months post‐... · informal caregivers of people affected by cancer
1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Intervention: high‐dose radiotherapy Comparison: low‐dose radiotherapy Outcome: neurocognitive impairment at 2 years after treatment · people with glioma surviving at least two years

It is very uncertain whether the intervention changes intervention: high‐dose radiotherapy Comparison: low‐dose… (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Intervention: high‐dose radiotherapy Comparison: low‐dose radiotherapy Outcome: neurocognitive impairment at 5 years after treatment · people with glioma surviving at least two years

It is very uncertain whether the intervention changes intervention: high‐dose radiotherapy Comparison: low‐dose… (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Lower lip bumper vs No active treatment (control)

Lower incisors to mandible (position, mm) at 9 months · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Lower lip bumper led to higher lower incisors to mandible at 6 months compared with no active treatment (control); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Lower lip bumper vs No active treatment (control)

Size of the lower jaw (arch length) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Lower lip bumper led to higher size of the lower jaw (mandibular arch length) at 6 months compared with no active treatment (control); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Lower lip bumper vs No active treatment (control)

Lower molars to mandible (relationship of lower back teeth to the mandible) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Lower lip bumper led to lower lower molars to mandible at 6 months compared with no active treatment (control); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Lower lingual arch vs No active treatment (control)

Size of the lower jaw (arch length) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Lower lingual arch led to higher size of the lower jaw (mandibular arch length) at 1 year compared with no active treatment (control); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Lower lingual arch vs No active treatment (control)

Lower incisors to mandible (position, mm) at 9 months · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Lower lingual arch led to higher lower incisors to mandible at 1 year compared with no active treatment (control); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Lower lingual arch vs No active treatment (control)

Lower molars to mandible (relationship of lower back teeth to the mandible) · Children or adolescents (aged 16 years old or under) receiving orthodontic treatment to prevent or correct crowded teeth

Lower lingual arch led to lower lower molars to mandible at 1 year compared with no active treatment (control); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Anticipated low‐responders: higher vs lower dose of FSH

300/450 IU vs 150 IU · women undergoing IVF/ICSI who are anticipated to have a low‐response to stimulation based on one or more ORT measure

Anticipated low responders: higher showed no clear difference in 300/450 IU vs 150 IU compared with lower dose of FSH (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Anticipated low‐responders: higher vs lower dose of FSH

400/450 IU vs 300 IU · women undergoing IVF/ICSI who are anticipated to have a low‐response to stimulation based on one or more ORT measure

Anticipated low responders: higher showed no clear difference in 400/450 IU vs 300 IU compared with lower dose of FSH (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review