Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

771 questions · 791 findings · 66 reviews

No studies found 207 · 26.2%GRADE not reported 47 · 5.9%Very low 172 · 21.7%Low 211 · 26.7%Moderate 107 · 13.5%High 47 · 5.9%

Thromboelastography threshold vs standard of care (laboratory parameters)

Number of individuals requiring a transfusion within 7 days № of participants: 60 (1 RCT) · patients undergoing non‐cardiac surgery/invasive procedures

Thromboelastography threshold may leads to lower number of individuals requiring a transfusion within 7 days № of… compared with standard of care (laboratory parameters) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Thromboelastography threshold vs standard of care (laboratory parameters)

Serious adverse events measured by plasma transfusion‐related complications within 24 hours № of participants: 21 (1 RCT) · patients undergoing non‐cardiac surgery/invasive procedures

It is very uncertain whether thromboelastography threshold changes serious adverse events measured by plasma transfusion‐related… compared with standard of care (laboratory parameters) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Thromboelastography threshold vs standard of care (laboratory parameters)

Serious adverse events measured by surgery or procedure‐related complications within 30 days ‐ not reported · patients undergoing non‐cardiac surgery/invasive procedures

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Quinolone vs macrolides

Quality of life Drug resistance/microbial sensitivity Serious adverse events Lung function Hospitalisations Adverse events/side effects Number of participants colonised with P aeruginosa · patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Macrolides vs tetracycline

Exacerbations (number of people experiencing ≥ 1 exacerbations) · patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Macrolide showed no clear difference in number of participants experiencing one or more exacerbations… compared with tetracycline (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Macrolides vs tetracycline

Quality of life Drug resistance/microbial sensitivity Serious adverse events Lung function Hospitalisations Adverse events/side effects Number of participants colonised with P aeruginosa · patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Macrolide+tetracycline vs macrolides

All‐cause serious adverse events 60 weeks (end of study) · patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

It is very uncertain whether macrolide+tetracycline changes all‐cause serious adverse events 60 weeks (end of study) compared with macrolide (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Macrolide+tetracycline vs macrolides

Number of people experiencing one or more exacerbations, Drug resistance/microbial sensitivity (as reported by trialists), including emergence of atypical bacteria, Number of participants colonised with Pseudomonas aeruginosa · patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Quinolone vs tetracycline

Quality of life Drug resistance/microbial sensitivity Serious adverse events Lung function Hospitalisations Adverse events/side effects Number of participants colonised with P aeruginosa · patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review