Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

1,938 questions · 1,994 findings · 246 reviews · Headline outcomes only

No studies found 490 · 24.6%GRADE not reported 71 · 3.6%Very low 669 · 33.6%Low 446 · 22.4%Moderate 264 · 13.2%High 54 · 2.7%

Surgical vs non‐surgical treatment

Functional outcomes · (mainly older) adults with most types of displaced proximal humeral fracturesa (10 trials)

Surgical showed no clear difference in functional scoresf(higher = better outcome) compared with non‐surgical treatment (high certainty).

3 findings from 1 review

Surgical vs non‐surgical treatment

Quality of life: EQ‐5D (0: dead to 1: best quality of life) · (mainly older) adults with most types of displaced proximal humeral fracturesa (10 trials)

Surgical showed no clear difference in quality of life: EQ‐5D (0: dead to 1: best quality of life) compared with non‐surgical treatment (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Surgical vs non‐surgical treatment

Adverse events / complications ‐ Number of participants with complications · (mainly older) adults with most types of displaced proximal humeral fracturesa (10 trials)

Surgical showed no clear difference in adverse events / complications ‐ Number of participants with… compared with non‐surgical treatment (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Non‐surgical vs surgical treatment of oesophageal cancer (primary outcomes)

Short‐term mortality All‐cause mortality either in‐hospital or within 3 months · patients with oesophageal cancer

It is very uncertain whether non‐surgical changes short‐term mortality All‐cause mortality either in‐hospital or… compared with surgical treatment of oesophageal cancer (primary outcomes) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Non‐surgical vs surgical treatment of oesophageal cancer (primary outcomes)

Proportion with any adverse event within 3 months Any adverse event within 3 months of any severity · patients with oesophageal cancer

It is very uncertain whether non‐surgical changes proportion with any adverse event within 3 months Any adverse event… compared with surgical treatment of oesophageal cancer (secondary outcomes) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Non‐surgical vs surgical treatment of oesophageal cancer (primary outcomes)

Long‐term mortality (binary outcome) All‐cause mortality for the duration of · patients with oesophageal cancer

Non‐surgical showed no clear difference in long‐term mortality (binary outcome) All‐cause mortality for the… compared with surgical treatment of oesophageal cancer (primary outcomes) (low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Non‐surgical vs surgical treatment of oesophageal cancer (primary outcomes)

Long‐term mortality (time‐to‐event outcome): chemoradiotherapy versus surgery All‐cause mortality for the duration of · patients with oesophageal cancer

Non‐surgical showed no clear difference in long‐term mortality (time‐to‐event outcome): chemoradiotherapy… compared with surgical treatment of oesophageal cancer (primary outcomes) (low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Non‐surgical vs surgical treatment of oesophageal cancer (primary outcomes)

Long‐term mortality (time‐to‐event outcome): radiotherapy versus surgery All‐cause mortality for the duration of · patients with oesophageal cancer

It is very uncertain whether non‐surgical changes long‐term mortality (time‐to‐event outcome): radiotherapy versus… compared with surgical treatment of oesophageal cancer (primary outcomes) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Non‐surgical vs surgical treatment of oesophageal cancer (primary outcomes)

Proportion of participants with 1 or more serious adverse events according to International Conference on Harmonisation Good Clinical Practice (ICH‐GCP) · patients with oesophageal cancer

It is very uncertain whether non‐surgical changes proportion with a serious adverse event within 3 months Serious… compared with surgical treatment of oesophageal cancer (primary outcomes) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Surgical vs conservative interventions

Treatment failure (indication for non‐routine secondary surgery) · adults (aged ≥ 16 years) with acute middle third clavicle fractures

Surgical may leads to lower treatment failuref Indication for non‐routine secondary surgery compared with conservative interventions (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Surgical vs conservative interventions

Total of participants with adverse event outcomel · adults (aged ≥ 16 years) with acute middle third clavicle fractures

It is very uncertain whether surgical changes total of participants with adverse event outcomel compared with conservative interventions (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review