Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

96 questions · 104 findings · 15 reviews · ENT

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 44 · 42.3%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 30 · 28.8%Low 19 · 18.3%Moderate 9 · 8.7%High 2 · 1.9%

Anti‐IL‐4Rα mAb (dupilumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)

Disease‐specific quality of life · patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

1 finding from 1 review

Biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
3 studies · 784 participants
High

Anti‐IL‐5 mAb (mepolizumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)

Disease severity ‐ VAS (range 0 to 10, lower = better) · patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

1 finding from 1 review

Biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 72 participants
Very low

Anti‐IL‐5 mAb (mepolizumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)

Extent of disease ‐ CT scan (lower score = better) · patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

1 finding from 1 review

Biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 27 participants
Very low

Anti‐IgE mAb (omalizumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)

Disease‐specific quality of life · patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

1 finding from 1 review

Biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 265 participants
Moderate

Anti‐IL‐4Rα mAb (dupilumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)

Disease severity ‐ VAS (range 0 to 10, lower = better) · patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

1 finding from 1 review

Biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
3 studies · 784 participants
Moderate

Anti‐IgE mAb (omalizumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)

Extent of disease ‐ endoscopic score · patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

1 finding from 1 review

Biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
4 studies · 312 participants
Low

Anti‐IgE mAb (omalizumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)

Extent of disease ‐ CT scan (lower score = better) · patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

1 finding from 1 review

Biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 47 participants
Very low

Anti‐IL‐4Rα mAb (dupilumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)

Extent of disease ‐ endoscopic score · patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

1 finding from 1 review

Biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
3 studies · 784 participants
Moderate

Anti‐IL‐4Rα mAb (dupilumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)

Extent of disease ‐ CT scan (lower score = better) · patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

1 finding from 1 review

Biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
3 studies · 784 participants
High

Anti‐IL‐5 mAb (mepolizumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)

Disease‐specific quality of life · patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps

1 finding from 1 review

Biologics for chronic rhinosinusitis 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 105 participants
Low

Intranasal corticosteroids vs placebo

Health outcomes Peak expiratory flow readings (higher readings indicate better peak flow) · adults and children > 12 with non‐allergic rhinitis

It is very uncertain whether intranasal corticosteroids changes objective measurement of airflow: peak flow rate (expiratory) compared with placebo (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Intranasal corticosteroids for non‐allergic rhinitis 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
SMD 1980
2 studies · 55 participants
Very low

Standard‐dose adjuvant radiotherapy alone vs adjuvant chemoradiotherapy

Swallowing ability · patients with HPV‐positive oropharyngeal carcinoma who have received minimally invasive transoral surgery

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

De‐intensified adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy versus standard adjuvant chemoradiotherapy post transoral minimally… 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Minimally invasive surgery vs Standard therapy alone (radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy)

Swallowing function (MDADI) · patients with small‐volume primary oropharyngeal carcinoma

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Minimally invasive surgery versus radiotherapy/chemoradiotherapy for small‐volume primary oropharyngeal carcinoma 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Tonsillectomy or adenotonsillectomy vs no surgery

Time off school or work · Children with chronic/recurrent acute tonsillitis

1 finding from 1 review

Tonsillectomy or adenotonsillectomy versus non‐surgical treatment for chronic/recurrent acute tonsillitis 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
4 studies · 412 participants
Moderate

Systemic corticosteroids plus intranasal steroid/mucolytic/decongestant vs no intervention

Psychophysical testing for recovery of sense of smell · adults with olfactory dysfunction for ≥ 4 weeks following COVID‐19 infection

It is very uncertain whether systemic corticosteroids plus intranasal… changes psychophysical testing for recovery of sense of smell compared with no intervention (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for the treatment of persistent post‐COVID‐19 olfactory dysfunction 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 11 [0.7, 173.66]
1 study · 18 participants
Very low

Palmitoylethanolamide and luteolin vs no intervention

Serious adverse events · adults with olfactory dysfunction for ≥ 4 weeks following COVID‐19 infection

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for the treatment of persistent post‐COVID‐19 olfactory dysfunction 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 12 participants
Very low

Palmitoylethanolamide and luteolin vs no intervention

Change in sense of smell · adults with olfactory dysfunction for ≥ 4 weeks following COVID‐19 infection

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for the treatment of persistent post‐COVID‐19 olfactory dysfunction 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 12 participants
Very low

Palmitoylethanolamide and luteolin vs no intervention

Generic quality of life measures · adults with olfactory dysfunction for ≥ 4 weeks following COVID‐19 infection

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for the treatment of persistent post‐COVID‐19 olfactory dysfunction 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Palmitoylethanolamide and luteolin vs no intervention

Presence of parosmia · adults with olfactory dysfunction for ≥ 4 weeks following COVID‐19 infection

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for the treatment of persistent post‐COVID‐19 olfactory dysfunction 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Palmitoylethanolamide and luteolin vs no intervention

Other adverse outcomes · adults with olfactory dysfunction for ≥ 4 weeks following COVID‐19 infection

1 finding from 1 review

Interventions for the treatment of persistent post‐COVID‐19 olfactory dysfunction 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 12 participants
Very low