Gap finder

Search review questions

Each row is one question a systematic review asked: who, what, compared with what, and which outcome, with the effect it found and how certain that is. Words match anywhere in the field.

Population

Intervention or exposure

Comparison

Outcome

Any field or review title

Field or topic

Source

Review versions

2,653 questions in 194 reviews · Gynaecology and Fertility

current versions

No studies 531 · 20%Ungraded 76 · 2.9%Very low 826 · 31.1%Low 855 · 32.2%Moderate 341 · 12.9%High 24 · 0.9%

Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.

Question	Effect	Evidence	Status / GRADE
LNG‐IUS vs hysterectomy Bleeding · heavy menstrual bleeding Progestogen‐releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding (2020) · Cochrane	RR 0.52 [0.39, 0.7]	1 study · 75 participants	Very low
LNG‐IUS vs hysterectomy Satisfaction · heavy menstrual bleeding Progestogen‐releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding (2020) · Cochrane	RR 1.01 [0.94, 1.08]	1 study · 232 participants	Low
LNG‐IUS vs hysterectomy Quality of life · heavy menstrual bleeding Progestogen‐releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding (2020) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	1 study · 221 participants	Low
LNG‐IUS vs hysterectomy Adverse events · heavy menstrual bleeding Progestogen‐releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding (2020) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
LNG‐IUS vs hysterectomy Treatment failure · heavy menstrual bleeding Progestogen‐releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding (2020) · Cochrane	RR 48.18 [2.96, 783.22]	1 study · 236 participants	Low
LNG‐IUS vs hysterectomy Cost · heavy menstrual bleeding Progestogen‐releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding (2020) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	12 participants	Low
LNG‐IUS vs any other medical treatment Satisfaction · heavy menstrual bleeding Progestogen‐releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding (2020) · Cochrane	RR 1.28 [1.01, 1.63]	3 studies · 141 participants	Very low
LNG‐IUS vs any other medical treatment Quality of life · heavy menstrual bleeding Progestogen‐releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding (2020) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	1 study · 571 participants	Moderate
LNG‐IUS vs any other medical treatment Adverse events · heavy menstrual bleeding Progestogen‐releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding (2020) · Cochrane	RR 0.91	1 study · 571 participants	Moderate
LNG‐IUS vs any other medical treatment Withdrawal from treatment for any reason · heavy menstrual bleeding Progestogen‐releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding (2020) · Cochrane	RR 0.49 [0.39, 0.6]	1 study · 571 participants	Moderate
LNG‐IUS vs any other medical treatment Treatment failure · heavy menstrual bleeding Progestogen‐releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding (2020) · Cochrane	RR 0.34 [0.26, 0.44]	6 studies · 535 participants	Moderate
LNG‐IUS vs any other medical treatment Cost · heavy menstrual bleeding Progestogen‐releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding (2020) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
LNG‐IUS vs endometrial ablation Bleeding · heavy menstrual bleeding Progestogen‐releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding (2020) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	2 studies · 122 participants	Very low
LNG‐IUS vs endometrial ablation Satisfaction with treatment · heavy menstrual bleeding Progestogen‐releasing intrauterine systems for heavy menstrual bleeding (2020) · Cochrane	RR 0.95 [0.85, 1.07]	5 studies · 317 participants	Low
Repeated single embryo transfer (mixed policies) vs multiple embryo transfer Cumulative live birth · transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection Number of embryos for transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intra‐cytoplasmic sperm injection (2020) · Cochrane	RR 0.95 [0.82, 1.1]	4 studies · 985 participants	Low
Repeated single embryo transfer (mixed policies) vs multiple embryo transfer Multiple pregnancy · transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection Number of embryos for transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intra‐cytoplasmic sperm injection (2020) · Cochrane	odds ratio 0.13 [0.08, 0.21]	4 studies · 985 participants	Moderate
Repeated single embryo transfer (mixed policies) vs multiple embryo transfer Clinical pregnancy rate · transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection Number of embryos for transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intra‐cytoplasmic sperm injection (2020) · Cochrane	RR 0.95 [0.84, 1.08]	3 studies · 943 participants	Low
Repeated single embryo transfer (mixed policies) vs multiple embryo transfer Miscarriage rate · transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection Number of embryos for transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intra‐cytoplasmic sperm injection (2020) · Cochrane	odds ratio 2.14 [0.93, 4.95]	2 studies · 282 participants	Low
Single vs multiple embryo transfer Live birth · transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection Number of embryos for transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intra‐cytoplasmic sperm injection (2020) · Cochrane	RR 0.67 [0.59, 0.75]	12 studies · 1904 participants	Low
Single vs multiple embryo transfer Multiple pregnancy · transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection Number of embryos for transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intra‐cytoplasmic sperm injection (2020) · Cochrane	odds ratio 0.16 [0.12, 0.22]	13 studies · 1952 participants	Moderate
Single vs multiple embryo transfer Clinical pregnancy · transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection Number of embryos for transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intra‐cytoplasmic sperm injection (2020) · Cochrane	RR 0.7 [0.64, 0.77]	10 studies · 1860 participants	Low
Single vs multiple embryo transfer Miscarriage rate · transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection Number of embryos for transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intra‐cytoplasmic sperm injection (2020) · Cochrane	odds ratio 0.96 [0.66, 1.42]	7 studies · 1560 participants	Low
Presurgical medical therapy vs placebo or no medical therapy Pain (continuous) Pelvic pain ≤ 12 months · women having endometriosis surgery Pre‐ and postsurgical medical therapy for endometriosis surgery (2020) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Postsurgical medical therapy vs placebo or no medical therapy Disease recurrence ≤ 12 months (dichotomous) · women having endometriosis surgery Pre‐ and postsurgical medical therapy for endometriosis surgery (2020) · Cochrane	RR 0.3 [0.17, 0.54]	4 studies · 433 participants	Low
Postsurgical medical therapy vs placebo or no medical therapy Disease recurrence ≤ 12 months (EEC stage) · women having endometriosis surgery Pre‐ and postsurgical medical therapy for endometriosis surgery (2020) · Cochrane	RR 0.88 [0.67, 1.15]	1 study · 285 participants	Very low
Postsurgical medical therapy vs placebo or no medical therapy Pregnancy rate (dichotomous) · women having endometriosis surgery Pre‐ and postsurgical medical therapy for endometriosis surgery (2020) · Cochrane	RR 1.19 [1.02, 1.38]	11 studies · 955 participants	Moderate
Presurgical medical therapy vs postsurgical medical therapy Pain (continuous) Pelvic pain ≤ 12 months · women having endometriosis surgery Pre‐ and postsurgical medical therapy for endometriosis surgery (2020) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Presurgical medical therapy vs postsurgical medical therapy Pain recurrence (dichotomous) Pain recurrence ≤ 12 months · women having endometriosis surgery Pre‐ and postsurgical medical therapy for endometriosis surgery (2020) · Cochrane	RR 1.4 [0.95, 2.07]	2 studies · 326 participants	Low
Presurgical medical therapy vs postsurgical medical therapy Disease recurrence at 12 months –total (AFS score) · women having endometriosis surgery Pre‐ and postsurgical medical therapy for endometriosis surgery (2020) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Presurgical medical therapy vs postsurgical medical therapy Disease recurrence ≤ 12 months (dichotomous) · women having endometriosis surgery Pre‐ and postsurgical medical therapy for endometriosis surgery (2020) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Presurgical medical therapy vs postsurgical medical therapy Disease recurrence ≤ 12 months (EEC stage) · women having endometriosis surgery Pre‐ and postsurgical medical therapy for endometriosis surgery (2020) · Cochrane	RR 1.26 [0.97, 1.65]	1 study · 273 participants	Very low
Presurgical medical therapy vs postsurgical medical therapy Pregnancy rate (dichotomous) · women having endometriosis surgery Pre‐ and postsurgical medical therapy for endometriosis surgery (2020) · Cochrane	RR 1.08 [0.9, 1.3]	1 study · 273 participants	Very low
Presurgical medical therapy vs placebo or no medical therapy Pain recurrence (dichotomous) Pain recurrence ≤ 12 months · women having endometriosis surgery Pre‐ and postsurgical medical therapy for endometriosis surgery (2020) · Cochrane	RR 1.1 [0.72, 1.66]	1 study · 262 participants	Very low
Presurgical medical therapy vs placebo or no medical therapy Disease recurrence at 3 months – total (AFS score) · women having endometriosis surgery Pre‐ and postsurgical medical therapy for endometriosis surgery (2020) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	1 study · 80 participants	Very low
Presurgical medical therapy vs placebo or no medical therapy Disease recurrence ≤ 12 months (dichotomous) · women having endometriosis surgery Pre‐ and postsurgical medical therapy for endometriosis surgery (2020) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Presurgical medical therapy vs placebo or no medical therapy Disease recurrence ≤ 12 months (EEC stage) · women having endometriosis surgery Pre‐ and postsurgical medical therapy for endometriosis surgery (2020) · Cochrane	RR 1.11 [0.86, 1.43]	1 study · 262 participants	Very low
Presurgical medical therapy vs placebo or no medical therapy Pregnancy rate (dichotomous) · women having endometriosis surgery Pre‐ and postsurgical medical therapy for endometriosis surgery (2020) · Cochrane	RR 1.18 [0.97, 1.45]	1 study · 262 participants	Very low
Postsurgical medical therapy vs placebo or no medical therapy Pain (continuous) Pelvic pain ≤ 12 months · women having endometriosis surgery Pre‐ and postsurgical medical therapy for endometriosis surgery (2020) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	3 studies · 340 participants	Very low
Postsurgical medical therapy vs placebo or no medical therapy Pain recurrence (dichotomous) Pain recurrence ≤ 12 months · women having endometriosis surgery Pre‐ and postsurgical medical therapy for endometriosis surgery (2020) · Cochrane	RR 0.7 [0.52, 0.94]	5 studies · 657 participants	Low
Postsurgical medical therapy vs placebo or no medical therapy Disease recurrence at 12 months – total (AFS score) · women having endometriosis surgery Pre‐ and postsurgical medical therapy for endometriosis surgery (2020) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	1 study · 53 participants	Very low
Tubal flushing with oil‐soluble contrast media (OSCM) vs no intervention Live birth · women with subfertility Tubal flushing for subfertility (2020) · Cochrane	OR 3.27 [1.57, 6.85]	3 studies · 204 participants	Low
Tubal flushing with water‐soluble contrast media (WSCM) vs no intervention Infection · women with subfertility Tubal flushing for subfertility (2020) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	1 study · 334 participants	Ungraded
Tubal flushing with water‐soluble contrast media (WSCM) vs no intervention Haemorrhage · women with subfertility Tubal flushing for subfertility (2020) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Tubal flushing with water‐soluble contrast media (WSCM) vs no intervention Long‐term complications · women with subfertility Tubal flushing for subfertility (2020) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	NR	No studies
Tubal flushing with oil‐soluble contrast media (OSCM) vs water‐soluble contrast media (WSCM) Live birth · women with subfertility Tubal flushing for subfertility (2020) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	3 studies · 2035 participants	Ungraded
Tubal flushing with oil‐soluble contrast media (OSCM) vs water‐soluble contrast media (WSCM) Clinical pregnancy · women with subfertility Tubal flushing for subfertility (2020) · Cochrane	OR 1.42 [1.1, 1.85]	6 studies · 2598 participants	Low
Tubal flushing with oil‐soluble contrast media (OSCM) vs water‐soluble contrast media (WSCM) Intravasation · women with subfertility Tubal flushing for subfertility (2020) · Cochrane	OR 5 [2.25, 11.12]	4 studies · 1912 participants	Moderate
Tubal flushing with oil‐soluble contrast media (OSCM) vs water‐soluble contrast media (WSCM) Infection · women with subfertility Tubal flushing for subfertility (2020) · Cochrane	OR 0.22 [0.04, 1.22]	2 studies · 662 participants	Very low
Tubal flushing with oil‐soluble contrast media (OSCM) vs water‐soluble contrast media (WSCM) Haemorrhage · women with subfertility Tubal flushing for subfertility (2020) · Cochrane	OR 0.65 [0.4, 1.06]	2 studies · 662 participants	Very low
Tubal flushing with oil‐soluble contrast media (OSCM) vs water‐soluble contrast media (WSCM) Long‐term complications (congenital abnormalities) · women with subfertility Tubal flushing for subfertility (2020) · Cochrane	no estimate extracted	1 study · 1119 participants	Ungraded