Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

4,756 questions · 13,493 findings · 1,305 reviews · Headline outcomes only

No studies found 2,594 · 19.2%GRADE not reported 728 · 5.4%Very low 2,868 · 21.3%Low 3,777 · 28%Moderate 2,620 · 19.4%High 906 · 6.7%

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

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) vs placebo or no treatment

Cardiovascular mortality · patients with chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) showed no clear difference in cardiovascular mortality (RR) compared with placebo or no treatment (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) vs placebo or no treatment

Heart failure hospitalisation (RR) · patients with chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) showed no clear difference in heart failure hospitalisation (RR) compared with placebo or no treatment (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) vs placebo or no treatment

Hyperkalaemia · patients with chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) leads to higher hyperkalaemia compared with placebo or no treatment (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) vs placebo or no treatment

All‐cause mortality (RR) · patients with chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) showed no clear difference in all‐cause mortality (RR) compared with placebo or no treatment (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Beta‐blockers vs placebo or no treatment

Heart failure hospitalisation (RR) · patients with chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

It is very uncertain whether beta‐blockers changes heart failure hospitalisation (RR) compared with placebo or no treatment (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) vs placebo or no treatment

Cardiovascular mortality · patients with chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) showed no clear difference in cardiovascular mortality (RR) compared with placebo or no treatment (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) vs placebo or no treatment

Heart failure hospitalisation (RR) · patients with chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) probably leads to lower heart failure hospitalisation (RR) compared with placebo or no treatment (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) vs placebo or no treatment

Hyperkalaemia · patients with chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) leads to higher hyperkalaemia compared with placebo or no treatment (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) vs placebo or no treatment

All‐cause mortality · patients with chronic heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) showed no clear difference in all‐cause mortality compared with placebo or no treatment (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Sclerotherapy vs placebo

Adverse events ‐ hyperpigmentation ( · people with telangiectasias and reticular veins

Sclerotherapy probably leads to higher adverse events ‐ hyperpigmentation ( compared with placebo (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Sclerotherapy vs placebo

Adverse events ‐ matting ( · people with telangiectasias and reticular veins

Sclerotherapy probably leads to higher adverse events ‐ matting ( compared with placebo (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review