Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

4,678 questions · 4,859 findings · 283 reviews

No studies found 1,225 · 25.2%GRADE not reported 215 · 4.4%Very low 1,241 · 25.5%Low 1,210 · 24.9%Moderate 776 · 16%High 192 · 4%

Summary of findings: split‐spinous process laminotomy vs conventional laminectomy

Disability Long‐term (≥ 12 months) Disability scores converted to 0 to 100 scale to allow for comparison of different disability scales (RMDQ, ODI, JOA) · patients with lumbar stenosis

Summary of findings: split‐spinous process laminotomy showed no clear difference in standardised Disability Index (0 to 100) Split‐spinous process… compared with conventional laminectomy (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: split‐spinous process laminotomy vs conventional laminectomy

Satisfactory recovery Bilateral laminotomy compared with conventional laminectomy Satisfactory recovery was defined as 'good' or 'excellent' self‐perceived recovery · patients with lumbar stenosis

Summary of findings: split‐spinous process laminotomy led to lower satisfactory recovery Split‐spinous process laminotomy compared with… compared with conventional laminectomy; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: split‐spinous process laminotomy vs conventional laminectomy

VAS leg (0 to 10) Split‐spinous process laminotomy compared with conventional laminectomy · patients with lumbar stenosis

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings: split‐spinous process laminotomy changes VAS leg (0 to 10) Split‐spinous process laminotomy compared with… compared with conventional laminectomy (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: split‐spinous process laminotomy vs conventional laminectomy

VAS back (0 to 10) Unilateral laminotomy compared with conventional laminectomy · patients with lumbar stenosis

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings: split‐spinous process laminotomy changes VAS back (0 to 10) Unilateral laminotomy compared with conventional… compared with conventional laminectomy (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: split‐spinous process laminotomy vs conventional laminectomy

Incidence of postoperative instability · patients with lumbar stenosis

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings: split‐spinous process laminotomy changes incidence of postoperative instability compared with conventional laminectomy (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: split‐spinous process laminotomy vs conventional laminectomy

Incidence of perioperative complications · patients with lumbar stenosis

Summary of findings: split‐spinous process laminotomy showed no clear difference in incidence of perioperative complications compared with conventional laminectomy (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: catgut implantation at acupoints vs valproate

50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency · participants with generalised epilepsy

Summary of findings: catgut implantation at acupoints showed no clear difference in 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency ( compared with valproate (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: catgut implantation at acupoints vs valproate

Frequency of adverse effects ‐ dizziness ( · participants with generalised epilepsy

Summary of findings: catgut implantation at acupoints showed no clear difference in frequency of adverse effects ‐ dizziness ( compared with valproate (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: catgut implantation at acupoints vs valproate

Frequency of adverse effects ‐ malaise ( · participants with generalised epilepsy

Summary of findings: catgut implantation at acupoints showed no clear difference in frequency of adverse effects ‐ malaise ( compared with valproate (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review