What do systematic reviews say?

Summary of findings ‐ nebulisers for delivering colistin: conventional systems vs AAD

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Nebuliser systems for drug delivery in cystic fibrosis 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Summary of findings ‐ nebulisers for delivering colistin: conventional systems vs AAD

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Nebuliser systems for drug delivery in cystic fibrosis 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Summary of findings ‐ nebulisers for delivering colistin: conventional systems vs AAD

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Nebuliser systems for drug delivery in cystic fibrosis 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Summary of findings ‐ nebulisers for delivering colistin: conventional systems vs AAD

• Nebuliser systems for drug delivery in cystic fibrosis 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 15 participants
  Very low

Summary of findings ‐ nebulisers for delivering colistin: conventional systems vs AAD

• Nebuliser systems for drug delivery in cystic fibrosis 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 259 participants
  Very low

Summary of findings ‐ nebulisers for delivering colistin: conventional systems vs AAD

Summary of findings ‐ nebulisers for delivering colistin:… may leads to lower participant satisfaction or preference compared with AAD (low certainty).

• Nebuliser systems for drug delivery in cystic fibrosis 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.45 [0.35, 0.57]
  1 study · 259 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: risk of intermediate hyperglycaemia (HbA1c5.7 definition) vs normoglycaemia

• Development of type 2 diabetes mellitus in people with intermediate hyperglycaemia 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  3196 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: risk of intermediate hyperglycaemia (HbA1c5.7 definition) vs normoglycaemia

• Development of type 2 diabetes mellitus in people with intermediate hyperglycaemia 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2027 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: risk of intermediate hyperglycaemia (HbA1c5.7 definition) vs normoglycaemia

• Development of type 2 diabetes mellitus in people with intermediate hyperglycaemia 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  0 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: risk of intermediate hyperglycaemia (HbA1c5.7 definition) vs normoglycaemia

• Development of type 2 diabetes mellitus in people with intermediate hyperglycaemia 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  5223 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: risk of intermediate hyperglycaemia (HbA1c6.0 definition) vs normoglycaemia

• Development of type 2 diabetes mellitus in people with intermediate hyperglycaemia 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1040 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: risk of intermediate hyperglycaemia (HbA1c6.0 definition) vs normoglycaemia

• Development of type 2 diabetes mellitus in people with intermediate hyperglycaemia 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  3492 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: risk of intermediate hyperglycaemia (HbA1c6.0 definition) vs normoglycaemia

• Development of type 2 diabetes mellitus in people with intermediate hyperglycaemia 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  0 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: risk of intermediate hyperglycaemia (HbA1c6.0 definition) vs normoglycaemia

• Development of type 2 diabetes mellitus in people with intermediate hyperglycaemia 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  0 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: risk of intermediate hyperglycaemia (HbA1c6.0 definition) vs normoglycaemia

• Development of type 2 diabetes mellitus in people with intermediate hyperglycaemia 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  4532 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: catgut implantation at acupoints plus antiepileptic drugs vs antiepileptic drugs alone

Summary of findings: catgut implantation at acupoints plus… showed no clear difference in seizure freedom ( compared with antiepileptic drugs alone (low certainty).

• Acupuncture for epilepsy 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.51 [0.93, 2.43]
  4 studies · 361 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: catgut implantation at acupoints plus antiepileptic drugs vs antiepileptic drugs alone

Summary of findings: catgut implantation at acupoints plus… may leads to higher 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency ( compared with antiepileptic drugs alone (low certainty).

• Acupuncture for epilepsy 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.42 [1.07, 1.89]
  5 studies · 401 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: catgut implantation at acupoints plus antiepileptic drugs vs antiepileptic drugs alone

• Acupuncture for epilepsy 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 120 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: catgut implantation at acupoints plus antiepileptic drugs vs antiepileptic drugs alone

Summary of findings: catgut implantation at acupoints plus… may leads to lower frequency of adverse effects ‐ dizziness ( compared with antiepileptic drugs alone (low certainty).

• Acupuncture for epilepsy 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.33 [0.13, 0.86]
  1 study · 120 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: catgut implantation at acupoints plus antiepileptic drugs vs antiepileptic drugs alone

Summary of findings: catgut implantation at acupoints plus… showed no clear difference in frequency of adverse effects ‐ malaise ( compared with antiepileptic drugs alone (low certainty).

• Acupuncture for epilepsy 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.5 [0.22, 1.15]
  1 study · 120 participants
  Low