evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

428 questions · 430 findings · 82 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 89 · 20.7%GRADE not reported 33 · 7.7%Very low 93 · 21.6%Low 110 · 25.6%Moderate 79 · 18.4%High 26 · 6%

Resin-based fissure sealant plus fluoride varnish vs Fluoride varnish

Changes in decayed, missing and filled (DMF) figures at whole-mouth level · Children and adolescents (general population, aged under 20 years)
1 finding from 1 review

Resin-based fissure sealant plus fluoride varnish vs Fluoride varnish

Dentine caries in permanent molars (24 months) · Children and adolescents (general population, aged under 20 years)

It is very uncertain whether resin-based fissure sealant plus fluoride varnish changes dentine caries in permanent molars (yes/no) compared with fluoride varnish alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Subfascial endoscopic perforator vein surgery (SEPS) + compression vs compression alone

The proportion of pressure ulcers healed · people with venous leg ulcers

Subfascial endoscopic perforator vein surgery (SEPS) + compression may leads to higher proportion with ulcers healed at 24 months compared with compression alone (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Subfascial endoscopic perforator vein surgery (SEPS) + compression vs compression alone

Recurrence of ulcers · people with venous leg ulcers

It is very uncertain whether subfascial endoscopic perforator vein surgery (SEPS) + compression changes ulcer recurrence at 24 months compared with compression alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table (subcomparison 5): chemotherapy or targeted therapy agent(s) plus control intervention vs control intervention

Overall survival · palliative participants with esophageal and GE‐junction carcinoma

Summary of findings table: chemotherapy or targeted therapy agent(s)… leads to lower overall survival compared with control intervention alone (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table (subcomparison 2): second‐line chemotherapy or targeted therapy agent(s) plus control intervention vs control intervention

Overall survival · palliative participants with esophageal and GE‐junction carcinoma previously treated with chemotherapy

Summary of findings table (subcomparison 2): second‐line… probably leads to lower overall survival compared with control intervention alone (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table (subcomparison 2): second‐line chemotherapy or targeted therapy agent(s) plus control intervention vs control intervention

Progression‐free survival · palliative participants with esophageal and GE‐junction carcinoma previously treated with chemotherapy

Summary of findings table (subcomparison 2): second‐line… may leads to lower progression‐free survival compared with control intervention alone (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table (subcomparison 2): second‐line chemotherapy or targeted therapy agent(s) plus control intervention vs control intervention

Toxicity · palliative participants with esophageal and GE‐junction carcinoma previously treated with chemotherapy

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings table (subcomparison 2): second‐line… changes toxicity compared with control intervention alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table (subcomparison 3): chemotherapy agent(s) plus control intervention vs control intervention

Overall survival · palliative participants with esophageal and GE‐junction carcinoma

Summary of findings table (subcomparison 3): chemotherapy agent(s)… probably leads to lower overall survival compared with control intervention alone (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review