What do systematic reviews say?

The introduction of nursing assistive personnel (NAP) to the hospital workforce vs usual staffing

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Hospital nurse‐staffing models and patient‐ and staff‐related outcomes 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

The introduction of nursing assistive personnel (NAP) to the hospital workforce vs usual staffing

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Hospital nurse‐staffing models and patient‐ and staff‐related outcomes 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

The introduction of nursing assistive personnel (NAP) to the hospital workforce vs usual staffing

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Hospital nurse‐staffing models and patient‐ and staff‐related outcomes 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

The introduction of nursing assistive personnel (NAP) to the hospital workforce vs usual staffing

• Hospital nurse‐staffing models and patient‐ and staff‐related outcomes 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  6769 participants
  Very low

The introduction of nursing assistive personnel (NAP) to the hospital workforce vs usual staffing

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Hospital nurse‐staffing models and patient‐ and staff‐related outcomes 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

The introduction of nursing assistive personnel (NAP) to the hospital workforce vs usual staffing

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Hospital nurse‐staffing models and patient‐ and staff‐related outcomes 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Intervention not reported

The intervention may leads to higher enrolment (low certainty).

• Interventions to promote patient utilisation of cardiac rehabilitation 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.27 [1.13, 1.42]
  19 studies · 3096 participants
  Low

Intervention not reported

• Interventions to promote patient utilisation of cardiac rehabilitation 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  9 studies · 1654 participants
  Low

Intervention not reported

The intervention probably leads to higher completion (moderate certainty).

• Interventions to promote patient utilisation of cardiac rehabilitation 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.13 [1.02, 1.25]
  8 studies · 1565 participants
  Moderate

Intervention not reported

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions to promote patient utilisation of cardiac rehabilitation 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Iron therapy vs No treatment, placebo, usual care, or another oral care measure

Iron therapy showed no clear difference in proportion of participants who received a blood transfusion compared with placebo, no treatment or standard care (low certainty).

• Iron therapy for preoperative anaemia 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.21 [0.87, 1.7]
  4 studies · 200 participants
  Low

Intravenous iron vs oral iron

Intravenous iron therapy may leads to higher ferritin preoperatively postintervention (ng/L) compared with oral iron therapy (low certainty).

• Iron therapy for preoperative anaemia 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  MD 395.03 [227.72, 562.35]
  2 studies · 151 participants
  Low

Iron therapy vs No treatment, placebo, usual care, or another oral care measure

• Iron therapy for preoperative anaemia 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 72 participants
  Very low

Iron therapy vs No treatment, placebo, usual care, or another oral care measure

Iron therapy may leads to higher ferritin at the end of preoperative treatment (ng/mL) compared with placebo, no treatment or standard care (low certainty).

• Iron therapy for preoperative anaemia 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  MD 149 [25.68, 272.32]
  1 study · 76 participants
  Low

Intravenous iron vs oral iron

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Iron therapy for preoperative anaemia 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Intravenous iron vs oral iron

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Iron therapy for preoperative anaemia 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Aqueous shunts with vs without mitomycin C

• Aqueous shunts with mitomycin C versus aqueous shunts alone for glaucoma 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  3 studies · 78 participants
  Low

Aqueous shunts with vs without mitomycin C

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Aqueous shunts with mitomycin C versus aqueous shunts alone for glaucoma 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Aqueous shunts with vs without mitomycin C

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Aqueous shunts with mitomycin C versus aqueous shunts alone for glaucoma 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Aqueous shunts with vs without mitomycin C

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Aqueous shunts with mitomycin C versus aqueous shunts alone for glaucoma 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found