What do systematic reviews say?

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors vs placebo

SSRI may leads to higher study withdrawal due to adverse events compared with placebo (low certainty).

• Selective serotonin re‐uptake inhibitors for premature ejaculation in adult men 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 3.8 [2.61, 5.51]
  20 studies · 7367 participants
  Low

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors vs placebo

SSRI probably leads to higher perceived control over ejaculation compared with placebo (moderate certainty).

• Selective serotonin re‐uptake inhibitors for premature ejaculation in adult men 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 2.29 [1.72, 3.05]
  3 studies · 4273 participants
  Moderate

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors vs placebo

SSRI probably leads to higher participant distress about PE compared with placebo (moderate certainty).

• Selective serotonin re‐uptake inhibitors for premature ejaculation in adult men 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.54 [1.26, 1.88]
  1 study · 652 participants
  Moderate

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors vs placebo

SSRI probably leads to higher adverse events compared with placebo (moderate certainty).

• Selective serotonin re‐uptake inhibitors for premature ejaculation in adult men 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.71 [1.48, 1.99]
  17 studies · 4624 participants
  Moderate

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors vs placebo

• Selective serotonin re‐uptake inhibitors for premature ejaculation in adult men 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  20 studies · 5872 participants
  Low

Implementation interventions vs no intervention

It is very uncertain whether implementation interventions changes quality of care: healthcare professional adherence to EBP at 12 months compared with no intervention (very low certainty).

• Implementation interventions to promote the uptake of evidence‐based practices in stroke rehabilitation 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.19 [0.53, 2.64]
  2 studies · 1455 participants
  Very low

Implementation interventions vs no intervention

Implementation interventions showed no clear difference in patient adherence to recommended treatment: number of outdoor… compared with no intervention (low certainty).

• Implementation interventions to promote the uptake of evidence‐based practices in stroke rehabilitation 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  MD 0.5
  1 study · 100 participants
  Low

Implementation interventions vs no intervention

Implementation interventions showed no clear difference in patient health status: HRQoL (EQ‐5D: –0.59 to 1, higher score… compared with no intervention (moderate certainty).

• Implementation interventions to promote the uptake of evidence‐based practices in stroke rehabilitation 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  MD 0.01
  2 studies · 1242 participants
  Moderate

Implementation interventions vs no intervention

Implementation interventions showed no clear difference in patient health status: ADL (Barthel Index, 0–20, higher score =… compared with no intervention (moderate certainty).

• Implementation interventions to promote the uptake of evidence‐based practices in stroke rehabilitation 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  MD 0.29
  2 studies · 1272 participants
  Moderate

Implementation interventions vs no intervention

Implementation interventions showed no clear difference in patient health status: psychological well‐being (GHQ‐12, 0–36,… compared with no intervention (low certainty).

• Implementation interventions to promote the uptake of evidence‐based practices in stroke rehabilitation 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 1273 participants
  Low

Implementation interventions vs no intervention

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Implementation interventions to promote the uptake of evidence‐based practices in stroke rehabilitation 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Intervention not reported

The intervention showed no clear difference in virological success (high certainty).

• Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.04 [0.99, 1.09]
  10 studies · 2438 participants
  High

Intervention not reported

The intervention showed no clear difference in severe adverse events: pyrexia (low certainty).

• Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.65 [0.15, 2.73]
  3 studies · 1799 participants
  Low

Intervention not reported

The intervention leads to lower severe adverse events: raised transaminases (high certainty).

• Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.52 [0.35, 0.78]
  3 studies · 1299 participants
  High

Intervention not reported

The intervention showed no clear difference in severe adverse events: raised alkaline phosphatase (low certainty).

• Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.65 [0.17, 2.5]
  1 study · 1007 participants
  Low

Intervention not reported

The intervention showed no clear difference in severe adverse events: raised amylase (low certainty).

• Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.4 [0.72, 2.73]
  2 studies · 1071 participants
  Low

Intervention not reported

The intervention showed no clear difference in severe adverse events: raised triglycerides (low certainty).

• Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.1 [0.39, 3.13]
  2 studies · 1071 participants
  Low

Intervention not reported

The intervention leads to lower severe adverse events: neutropenia (high certainty).

• Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.48 [0.28, 0.82]
  3 studies · 1799 participants
  High

Intervention not reported

The intervention showed no clear difference in severe adverse events: rash (moderate certainty).

• Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.58 [0.34, 1]
  7 studies · 2277 participants
  Moderate

Intervention not reported

• Efavirenz or nevirapine in three‐drug combination therapy with two nucleoside or nucleotide‐reverse transcriptase… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 135 participants
  Moderate