evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

4,721 questions · 19,640 findings · 2,039 reviews · Headline outcomes only

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 3,754 · 19.1%GRADE not reported 1,273 · 6.5%Very low 4,859 · 24.7%Low 5,568 · 28.4%Moderate 3,240 · 16.5%High 946 · 4.8%

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

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 1.5 mg/kg weekly prophylaxis vs on‐demand therapy

Proportion with zero bleeds · people without inhibitors

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 1.5 mg/kg weekly prophylaxis may leads to higher proportion of participants with zero bleeds compared with on‐demand therapy (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 1.5 mg/kg weekly prophylaxis vs on‐demand therapy

All adverse events · people without inhibitors

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 1.5 mg/kg weekly prophylaxis probably leads to higher all adverse events compared with on‐demand therapy (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 1.5 mg/kg weekly prophylaxis vs on‐demand therapy

Serious adverse events · people without inhibitors

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 1.5 mg/kg weekly prophylaxis showed no clear difference in serious adverse events compared with on‐demand therapy (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 3.0 mg/kg bi‐weekly prophylaxis vs on‐demand therapy

Proportion with zero bleeds · people without inhibitors

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 3.0 mg/kg bi‐weekly prophylaxis showed no clear difference in proportion of participants with zero bleeds compared with on‐demand therapy (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 3.0 mg/kg bi‐weekly prophylaxis vs on‐demand therapy

All adverse events · people without inhibitors

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 3.0 mg/kg bi‐weekly prophylaxis probably leads to higher all adverse events compared with on‐demand therapy (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 3.0 mg/kg bi‐weekly prophylaxis vs on‐demand therapy

Serious adverse events · people without inhibitors

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 3.0 mg/kg bi‐weekly prophylaxis showed no clear difference in serious adverse events compared with on‐demand therapy (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicizumab 1.5 mg/kg once weekly vs emicizumab 3.0 mg/kg every 2 weeks

Proportion with zero bleeds · people without inhibitors

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicizumab 1.5 mg/kg once weekly showed no clear difference in proportion of participants with zero bleeds compared with emicizumab 3.0 mg/kg every 2 weeks (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicizumab prophylaxis vs on‐demand therapy

Proportion with zero bleeds · people with inhibitors

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicizumab prophylaxis probably leads to higher proportion with zero bleeds compared with on‐demand therapy (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review