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.
915 questions in 93 reviews · Emergency and Critical Care
current versionsNo studies 141 · 15.4%Ungraded 22 · 2.4%Very low 216 · 23.6%Low 272 · 29.7%Moderate 188 · 20.5%High 76 · 8.3%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
Right lateral position vs left lateral position Global indicators of tissue oxygenation impairmentj Mixed venous saturation (SvO2) < 60% · critically ill adult patients Lateral positioning for critically ill adult patients (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 103 participants | Low |
Bad lung down vs good lung down Hypoxaemia PaO2 < 60 mmHg · critically ill adult patients with unilateral lung disease Lateral positioning for critically ill adult patients (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 19 participants | Low |
Bad lung down vs good lung down Global indicators of tissue oxygenation impairment Arterial‐venous oxygen content difference (C(a‐v)O2) ‐ not reported · critically ill adult patients with unilateral lung disease Lateral positioning for critically ill adult patients (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 30 participants | Ungraded |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) vs any comparison Mortality longest · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.52 [0.28, 0.95] | 8 studies · 717 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) vs clinical judgement or usual care Proportion of patients receiving platelets · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.59 [0.43, 0.8] | 6 studies · 486 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) vs clinical judgement or usual care Rate of surgical reintervention · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.62 [0.32, 1.2] | 5 studies · 537 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) vs standard laboratory test (SLT)‐guided transfusion Mortality · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.36 [0.16, 0.84] | 4 studies · 272 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) vs standard laboratory test (SLT)‐guided transfusion Proportion of patients receiving PRBCs · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.91 [0.83, 1] | 3 studies · 244 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) vs standard laboratory test (SLT)‐guided transfusion Proportion of patients receiving FFP · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.83 [0.49, 1.4] | 4 studies · 346 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) vs standard laboratory test (SLT)‐guided transfusion Proportion of patients receiving platelets · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.87 [0.68, 1.11] | 3 studies · 244 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) vs standard laboratory test (SLT)‐guided transfusion Rate of surgical reintervention · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.82 [0.46, 1.46] | 3 studies · 248 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) in combination with SLT or other devices vs clinical judgement or usual care Mortality · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.2 [0.05, 0.75] | 2 studies · 205 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) in combination with SLT or other devices vs clinical judgement or usual care Proportion of patients receiving PRBCs · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.85 [0.74, 0.98] | 3 studies · 307 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) in combination with SLT or other devices vs clinical judgement or usual care Proportion of patients receiving FFP · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.46 [0.2, 1.08] | 3 studies · 307 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) vs any comparison Proportion of patients receiving PRBCs · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.86 [0.79, 0.94] | 10 studies · 832 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) in combination with SLT or other devices vs clinical judgement or usual care Proportion of patients receiving platelets · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.75 [0.47, 1.2] | 3 studies · 307 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) in combination with SLT or other devices vs clinical judgement or usual care Rate of surgical reintervention · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.41 [0.17, 0.96] | 4 studies · 400 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) vs any comparison Proportion of patients receiving FFP · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.57 [0.33, 0.96] | 8 studies · 761 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) vs any comparison Proportion of patients receiving platelets · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.73 [0.6, 0.88] | 10 studies · 832 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) vs any comparison Rate of surgical reintervention · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.75 [0.5, 1.1] | 9 studies · 887 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) vs any comparison Excessive bleeding events and massive transfusion · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.82 [0.38, 1.77] | 2 studies · 280 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) vs clinical judgement or usual care Mortality · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.81 [0.32, 2.01] | 4 studies · 445 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) vs clinical judgement or usual care Proportion of patients receiving PRBCs · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.85 [0.73, 1] | 6 studies · 486 participants | Low |
Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) vs clinical judgement or usual care Proportion of patients receiving FFP · adults or children with bleeding Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) to monitor haemostatic treatment versus usual care… (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.38 [0.21, 0.68] | 4 studies · 415 participants | Low |
Impregnated catheters vs non‐impregnated catheters Clinically‐diagnosed sepsis Identified by clinical, biochemical and/or microbiological methods · adult patients who required central venous catheters Catheter impregnation, coating or bonding for reducing central venous catheter‐related infections in adults (2016) · Cochrane | RR 1 [0.88, 1.13] | 12 studies · 3686 participants | Moderate |
Impregnated catheters vs non‐impregnated catheters Catheter‐related blood stream infection (CRBSI) Identified by catheter culture and clinical features +/‐ haematological and biochemical parameters · adult patients who required central venous catheters Catheter impregnation, coating or bonding for reducing central venous catheter‐related infections in adults (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.62 [0.52, 0.74] | 42 studies · 10405 participants | High |
Impregnated catheters vs non‐impregnated catheters All‐cause mortality · adult patients who required central venous catheters Catheter impregnation, coating or bonding for reducing central venous catheter‐related infections in adults (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.92 [0.8, 1.07] | 10 studies · 2643 participants | High |
Impregnated catheters vs non‐impregnated catheters Catheter colonization Identified by catheter culture (microbiological methods) · adult patients who required central venous catheters Catheter impregnation, coating or bonding for reducing central venous catheter‐related infections in adults (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.67 [0.59, 0.76] | 43 studies · 9910 participants | Moderate |
Impregnated catheters vs non‐impregnated catheters Catheter‐related local infection Identified by catheter culture (microbiological methods) and clinical features · adult patients who required central venous catheters Catheter impregnation, coating or bonding for reducing central venous catheter‐related infections in adults (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.84 [0.66, 1.07] | 12 studies · 2688 participants | Moderate |
Impregnated catheters vs non‐impregnated catheters Adverse effects (combined) Identified by clinical assessment · adult patients who required central venous catheters Catheter impregnation, coating or bonding for reducing central venous catheter‐related infections in adults (2016) · Cochrane | RR 1.09 [0.94, 1.27] | 10 studies · 3003 participants | High |
Percutaneous techniques vs surgical techniques Mortality directly related to the procedure (Total mortality) · patients with tracheostomy Percutaneous techniques versus surgical techniques for tracheostomy (2016) · Cochrane | 0.52 [0.1, 2.6] | 4 studies · 257 participants | Low |
Percutaneous techniques vs surgical techniques Intraoperative serious, life‐threatening adverse events · patients with tracheostomy Percutaneous techniques versus surgical techniques for tracheostomy (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.93 [0.57, 1.53] | 12 studies · 1211 participants | Low |
Percutaneous techniques vs surgical techniques Direct postoperative serious, life‐threatening adverse events · patients with tracheostomy Percutaneous techniques versus surgical techniques for tracheostomy (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.72 [0.41, 1.25] | 10 studies · 984 participants | Low |
Percutaneous techniques vs surgical techniques Wound infection/stomatitis · patients with tracheostomy Percutaneous techniques versus surgical techniques for tracheostomy (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.24 [0.15, 0.37] | 12 studies · 936 participants | Moderate |
Percutaneous techniques vs surgical techniques Unfavourable scarring · patients with tracheostomy Percutaneous techniques versus surgical techniques for tracheostomy (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.25 [0.07, 0.91] | 6 studies · 789 participants | Low |
Percutaneous techniques vs surgical techniques Major bleeding · patients with tracheostomy Percutaneous techniques versus surgical techniques for tracheostomy (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.7 [0.45, 1.09] | 10 studies · 984 participants | Very low |
Percutaneous techniques vs surgical techniques Tracheostomy tube occlusion/obstruction, accidental decannulation, difficult tube change · patients with tracheostomy Percutaneous techniques versus surgical techniques for tracheostomy (2016) · Cochrane | RR 1.36 [0.65, 2.82] | 6 studies · 538 participants | Low |
Intravenous midazolam vs diazepam Level of sedation on a sedation assessment scale · adults and children requiring sedation before gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy Midazolam for sedation before procedures (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 75 participants | Very low |
Intravenous midazolam vs placebo Incomplete procedures · adults requiring sedation before gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy Midazolam for sedation before procedures (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Intravenous midazolam vs placebo Anterograde amnesia (defined by number of participants who recalled the procedure) · adults requiring sedation before gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy Midazolam for sedation before procedures (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Intravenous midazolam vs placebo Disinhibition or excitation · adults requiring sedation before gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy Midazolam for sedation before procedures (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Intravenous midazolam vs placebo Discomfort/pain · adults requiring sedation before gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy Midazolam for sedation before procedures (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 167 participants | Very low |
Intravenous midazolam vs placebo Allergic or anaphylactoid reaction · adults requiring sedation before gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy Midazolam for sedation before procedures (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Oral midazolam vs chloral hydrate Level of sedation on sedation assessment scale · children requiring sedation before procedures that require motion control, including echocardiography, lumbar… Midazolam for sedation before procedures (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 160 participants | Moderate |
Oral midazolam vs chloral hydrate Numeric rating of anxiety or rated as anxious · children requiring sedation before procedures that require motion control, including echocardiography, lumbar… Midazolam for sedation before procedures (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 88 participants | Very low |
Oral midazolam vs chloral hydrate Incomplete procedures · children requiring sedation before procedures that require motion control, including echocardiography, lumbar… Midazolam for sedation before procedures (2016) · Cochrane | RR 4.01 [1.92, 8.4] | 4 studies · 268 participants | Moderate |
Oral midazolam vs chloral hydrate Anterograde amnesia (defined by number of participants who recalled the procedure) · children requiring sedation before procedures that require motion control, including echocardiography, lumbar… Midazolam for sedation before procedures (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Oral midazolam vs chloral hydrate Disinhibition or excitation · children requiring sedation before procedures that require motion control, including echocardiography, lumbar… Midazolam for sedation before procedures (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Intravenous midazolam vs diazepam Numeric rating of anxiety or rated as anxious · adults and children requiring sedation before gastrointestinal endoscopy and bronchoscopy Midazolam for sedation before procedures (2016) · Cochrane | RR 0.8 [0.39, 1.62] | 2 studies · 175 participants | Low |
Oral midazolam vs chloral hydrate Discomfort · children requiring sedation before procedures that require motion control, including echocardiography, lumbar… Midazolam for sedation before procedures (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |