Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

2,209 questions · 2,322 findings · 227 reviews · Headline outcomes only

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 644 · 27.7%GRADE not reported 135 · 5.8%Very low 591 · 25.5%Low 582 · 25.1%Moderate 309 · 13.3%High 61 · 2.6%

Comparison 3. Interactive educational meetings vs didactic (lecture‐based) educational meetings

Improvement in patients' low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (median and meanf)Â · health personnel

1 finding from 1 review

Continuing education meetings and workshops: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 54 participants
Very low

Active tDCS plus semantic word‐retrieval training vs sham tDCS plus semantic word‐retrieval training

Word retrieval · adults with primary progressive aphasia (PPA)

1 finding from 1 review

Non‐pharmacological interventions for improving language and communication in people with primary progressive aphasia 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 3 participants
Very low

Active tDCS plus semantic word‐retrieval training vs sham tDCS plus semantic word‐retrieval training

Overall language abilities · adults with primary progressive aphasia (PPA)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Non‐pharmacological interventions for improving language and communication in people with primary progressive aphasia 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Active tDCS plus semantic word‐retrieval training vs sham tDCS plus semantic word‐retrieval training

Cognitive function · adults with primary progressive aphasia (PPA)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Non‐pharmacological interventions for improving language and communication in people with primary progressive aphasia 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Active tDCS plus semantic word‐retrieval training vs sham tDCS plus semantic word‐retrieval training

Quality of life · adults with primary progressive aphasia (PPA)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Non‐pharmacological interventions for improving language and communication in people with primary progressive aphasia 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Active tDCS plus semantic word‐retrieval training vs sham tDCS plus semantic word‐retrieval training

Adverse events · adults with primary progressive aphasia (PPA)

1 finding from 1 review

Non‐pharmacological interventions for improving language and communication in people with primary progressive aphasia 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 3 participants
Very low

Active tDCS plus phonological word‐retrieval training vs sham tDCS plus phonological word‐retrieval training

Word retrieval · adults with primary progressive aphasia (PPA)

1 finding from 1 review

Non‐pharmacological interventions for improving language and communication in people with primary progressive aphasia 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 6 participants
Very low

Active tDCS plus phonological word‐retrieval training vs sham tDCS plus phonological word‐retrieval training

Overall language abilities · adults with primary progressive aphasia (PPA)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Non‐pharmacological interventions for improving language and communication in people with primary progressive aphasia 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Active tDCS plus phonological word‐retrieval training vs sham tDCS plus phonological word‐retrieval training

Cognitive function · adults with primary progressive aphasia (PPA)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Non‐pharmacological interventions for improving language and communication in people with primary progressive aphasia 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Active tDCS plus phonological word‐retrieval training vs sham tDCS plus phonological word‐retrieval training

Quality of life · adults with primary progressive aphasia (PPA)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Non‐pharmacological interventions for improving language and communication in people with primary progressive aphasia 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Active tDCS plus phonological word‐retrieval training vs sham tDCS plus phonological word‐retrieval training

Adverse events · adults with primary progressive aphasia (PPA)

1 finding from 1 review

Non‐pharmacological interventions for improving language and communication in people with primary progressive aphasia 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 6 participants
Very low

Active cycle of breathing techniques plus routine treatment vs routine treatment alone

Length of hospital stay · people with pneumonia

1 finding from 1 review

Chest physiotherapy for pneumonia in adults 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 32 participants
Very low

Active cycle of breathing techniques plus routine treatment vs routine treatment alone

Duration of fever · people with pneumonia

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Chest physiotherapy for pneumonia in adults 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Active cycle of breathing techniques plus routine treatment vs routine treatment alone

Duration of total antibiotic therapy ‐ not reported · people with pneumonia

1 finding from 1 review

Chest physiotherapy for pneumonia in adults 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 32 participants
Very low

Active cycle of breathing techniques plus routine treatment vs routine treatment alone

Duration of ICU stay ‐ not reported · people with pneumonia

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Chest physiotherapy for pneumonia in adults 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Active cycle of breathing techniques plus routine treatment vs routine treatment alone

Duration of mechanical ventilation ‐ not reported · people with pneumonia

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Chest physiotherapy for pneumonia in adults 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Active cycle of breathing techniques plus routine treatment vs routine treatment alone

All‐cause mortality · people with pneumonia

1 finding from 1 review

Chest physiotherapy for pneumonia in adults 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
1 study · 32 participants
Very low

Active cycle of breathing techniques plus routine treatment vs routine treatment alone

Cure rate · people with pneumonia

It is very uncertain whether active cycle of breathing techniques plus routine treatment changes cure rate compared with routine treatment alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Chest physiotherapy for pneumonia in adults 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.6 [0.29, 1.23]
1 study · 32 participants
Very low

Point‐of‐care biomarkers (C‐reactive protein) for infection vs usual care

Number of participants given an antibiotic prescription at index consultation Â · people with acute respiratory infections

1 finding from 1 review

Biomarkers as point‐of‐care tests to guide prescription of antibiotics in people with acute respiratory infections in… 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
12 studies · 10218 participants
Moderate

Point‐of‐care biomarkers (C‐reactive protein) for infection vs usual care

Number of participants given an antibiotic prescription within 28 days · people with acute respiratory infections

1 finding from 1 review

Biomarkers as point‐of‐care tests to guide prescription of antibiotics in people with acute respiratory infections in… 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
7 studies · 5091 participants
High