evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

4,730 questions · 18,059 findings · 1,282 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 4,360 · 24.1%GRADE not reported 2,529 · 14%Very low 4,641 · 25.7%Low 4,007 · 22.2%Moderate 2,057 · 11.4%High 465 · 2.6%

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

Thrombo‐aspiration alone vs stent‐retrieval thrombectomy alone

Successful reperfusion (mTICI 2b to 3) postprocedure · people with acute ischemic stroke

Thrombo‐aspiration alone showed no clear difference in successful reperfusion (mTICI 2b to 3) postprocedure compared with stent‐retrieval thrombectomy alone (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Thrombo‐aspiration alone vs stent‐retrieval thrombectomy alone

All‐cause mortality within 3 months · people with acute ischemic stroke

Thrombo‐aspiration alone showed no clear difference in all‐cause mortality within 3 months compared with stent‐retrieval thrombectomy alone (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Thrombo‐aspiration alone vs stent‐retrieval thrombectomy alone

Intracranial hemorrhage on imaging at 24 hours · people with acute ischemic stroke

Thrombo‐aspiration alone showed no clear difference in intracranial hemorrhage on imaging at 24 hours compared with stent‐retrieval thrombectomy alone (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Thrombo‐aspiration alone vs stent‐retrieval thrombectomy alone

Symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage at · people with acute ischemic stroke

Thrombo‐aspiration alone showed no clear difference in symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage at 24 hours compared with stent‐retrieval thrombectomy alone (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Thrombo‐aspiration alone vs stent‐retrieval thrombectomy alone

Procedure‐related adverse events within 3 months · people with acute ischemic stroke

Thrombo‐aspiration alone showed no clear difference in procedure‐related adverse events within 3 months compared with stent‐retrieval thrombectomy alone (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Electrical or magnetic stimulation vs no treatment, sham treatment or verbal/written instruction

Number of participants experiencing surface or skin‐related adverse events: e.g. skin reactions, bruising, hypersensitivity to gel · men with urinary incontinence following prostate surgery

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Electrical or magnetic stimulation vs no treatment, sham treatment or verbal/written instruction

Number of participants experiencing muscle‐related adverse events: e.g. soreness, discomfort, cramps, pain · men with urinary incontinence following prostate surgery

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Combinations of conservative treatments vs no treatment, sham treatment or verbal/written instruction

Perception of improvement or cure · men with urinary incontinence following prostate surgery

Combinations of conservative treatments showed no clear difference in subjective cure or improvement: patient‐reported as defined by the… compared with no treatment, sham treatment or verbal/written instruction (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Combinations of conservative treatments vs no treatment, sham treatment or verbal/written instruction

Disease‐specific quality of life · men with urinary incontinence following prostate surgery

Combinations of conservative treatments showed no clear difference in condition‐specific quality of life: using validated questionnaires,… compared with no treatment, sham treatment or verbal/written instruction (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Combinations of conservative treatments vs no treatment, sham treatment or verbal/written instruction

Objective cure or improvement: > 6 to 12 months · men with urinary incontinence following prostate surgery

Combinations of conservative treatments showed no clear difference in objective cure or improvement: > 6 to 12 months compared with no treatment, sham treatment or verbal/written instruction (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Combinations of conservative treatments vs no treatment, sham treatment or verbal/written instruction

QoL · men with urinary incontinence following prostate surgery

Combinations of conservative treatments showed no clear difference in general quality of life: > 6 to 12 months compared with no treatment, sham treatment or verbal/written instruction (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Combinations of conservative treatments vs no treatment, sham treatment or verbal/written instruction

Number of participants experiencing muscle‐related adverse events: e.g. soreness, discomfort, cramps, pain · men with urinary incontinence following prostate surgery

It is very uncertain whether combinations of conservative treatments changes number of participants experiencing muscle‐related adverse events:… compared with no treatment, sham treatment or verbal/written instruction (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) plus biofeedback vs no treatment, sham treatment or verbal/written instruction

Number of participants experiencing surface or skin‐related adverse events: e.g. skin reactions, bruising, hypersensitivity to gel · men with urinary incontinence following prostate surgery
1 finding from 1 review