Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

2,509 questions · 2,666 findings · 288 reviews

No studies found 743 · 27.9%GRADE not reported 327 · 12.3%Very low 775 · 29.1%Low 484 · 18.2%Moderate 279 · 10.5%High 58 · 2.2%

Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) vs clinical judgement or usual care

Rate of surgical reintervention · adults or children with bleeding

Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) showed no clear difference in rate of surgical reintervention compared with clinical judgement or usual care (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) vs standard laboratory test (SLT)‐guided transfusion

Rate of surgical reintervention · adults or children with bleeding

Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) showed no clear difference in rate of surgical reintervention compared with standard laboratory test (SLT)‐guided transfusion (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) in combination with SLT or other devices vs clinical judgement or usual care

Rate of surgical reintervention · adults or children with bleeding

Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) in… may leads to lower rate of surgical reintervention compared with clinical judgement or usual care (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) vs any comparison

Rate of surgical reintervention · adults or children with bleeding

Thromboelastography (TEG) or thromboelastometry (ROTEM) showed no clear difference in rate of surgical reintervention compared with any comparison (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Incidence of any surgical site infection · lower limb arterial surgery

It is very uncertain whether the intervention changes incidence of any surgical site infection (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Open surgical drainage versus EUS‐guided drainage · patients with pancreatic pseudocysts

It is very uncertain whether the intervention changes open surgical drainage versus EUS‐guided drainage (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Open surgical drainage versus EUS‐guided drainage · patients with pancreatic pseudocysts
1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Open surgical drainage versus EUS‐guided drainage Scale from: 0 to 100. Higher indicates better · patients with pancreatic pseudocysts
1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Surgical intervention · Treating bleeding trauma patients

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

1 finding from 1 review

Intervention not reported

Surgical intervention · Treating patients with traumatic brain injury

The intervention showed no clear difference in surgical intervention (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Combined surgery vs phacoemulsification alone

Proportion who received intervention for surgical complications within one year Number of participants · patients with eyes with cataract and glaucoma

Combined surgery showed no clear difference in proportion who received intervention for surgical complications… compared with phacoemulsification alone (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review