Gap finder
Search review questions
Each row is one question a systematic review asked: who, what, compared with what, and which outcome, with the effect it found and how certain that is. Words match anywhere in the field.
2,653 questions in 194 reviews · Gynaecology and Fertility
current versionsNo studies 531 · 20%Ungraded 76 · 2.9%Very low 826 · 31.1%Low 855 · 32.2%Moderate 341 · 12.9%High 24 · 0.9%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
| Question | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Warmed, or warmed and humidified CO2 vs unwarmed and unhumidified CO2 Adverse events · women undergoing gynaecological laparoscopic procedures Interventions to reduce shoulder pain following gynaecological laparoscopic procedures (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Warmed, or warmed and humidified CO2 vs unwarmed and unhumidified CO2 Analgesia usage (morphine mg) over 48 hours post‐operatively · women undergoing gynaecological laparoscopic procedures Interventions to reduce shoulder pain following gynaecological laparoscopic procedures (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 95 participants | Low |
Gasless laparoscopy vs CO2 insufflation Incidence of STP · women undergoing gynaecological laparoscopic procedures Interventions to reduce shoulder pain following gynaecological laparoscopic procedures (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Gasless laparoscopy vs CO2 insufflation Severity of STP over 72 hours post‐operatively · women undergoing gynaecological laparoscopic procedures Interventions to reduce shoulder pain following gynaecological laparoscopic procedures (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 54 participants | Low |
Gasless laparoscopy vs CO2 insufflation Adverse events · women undergoing gynaecological laparoscopic procedures Interventions to reduce shoulder pain following gynaecological laparoscopic procedures (2019) · Cochrane | OR 2.56 [0.25, 26.28] | 1 study · 54 participants | Low |
Gasless laparoscopy vs CO2 insufflation Analgesia usage · women undergoing gynaecological laparoscopic procedures Interventions to reduce shoulder pain following gynaecological laparoscopic procedures (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Specific technique vs standard technique Adverse events · women undergoing a diagnostic or operative laparoscopic gynaecological procedure Interventions to reduce shoulder pain following gynaecological laparoscopic procedures (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 74 participants | Ungraded |
Specific technique vs standard technique Analgesia usage during study · women undergoing a diagnostic or operative laparoscopic gynaecological procedure Interventions to reduce shoulder pain following gynaecological laparoscopic procedures (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 570 participants | Low |
Fluid instillation vs no fluid instillation Incidence of STP at 24 hours post‐operatively · women undergoing a diagnostic or operative laparoscopic gynaecological procedure Interventions to reduce shoulder pain following gynaecological laparoscopic procedures (2019) · Cochrane | OR 0.38 [0.22, 0.66] | 2 studies · 220 participants | Moderate |
Fluid instillation vs no fluid instillation Severity of STP at 24 hours post‐operatively · women undergoing a diagnostic or operative laparoscopic gynaecological procedure Interventions to reduce shoulder pain following gynaecological laparoscopic procedures (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 205 participants | Moderate |
Fluid instillation vs no fluid instillation Adverse events · women undergoing a diagnostic or operative laparoscopic gynaecological procedure Interventions to reduce shoulder pain following gynaecological laparoscopic procedures (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Fluid instillation vs no fluid instillation Analgesia usage (meperidine mg) within 24 hours post‐operatively · women undergoing a diagnostic or operative laparoscopic gynaecological procedure Interventions to reduce shoulder pain following gynaecological laparoscopic procedures (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 205 participants | Low |
Intraperitoneal drain vs no intraperitoneal drain Incidence of STP at 24 hours post‐operatively · women undergoing a diagnostic or operative laparoscopic gynaecological procedure Interventions to reduce shoulder pain following gynaecological laparoscopic procedures (2019) · Cochrane | OR 0.3 [0.2, 0.46] | 3 studies · 417 participants | Low |
TLS with conventional morphological assessment of still TLS images vs conventional incubation and assessment Live birth or ongoing pregnancy · couples undergoing assisted reproductive technology Time‐lapse systems for embryo incubation and assessment in assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | OR 0.91 [0.67, 1.23] | 3 studies · 826 participants | Low |
TLS utilising embryo selection software vs conventional incubation and assessment Miscarriage · couples undergoing ART Time‐lapse systems for embryo incubation and assessment in assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | OR 0.63 [0.45, 0.89] | 3 studies · 1617 participants | Very low |
TLS utilising embryo selection software vs conventional incubation and assessment Stillbirth · couples undergoing ART Time‐lapse systems for embryo incubation and assessment in assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 600 participants | Ungraded |
TLS utilising embryo selection software vs conventional incubation and assessment Clinical pregnancy · couples undergoing ART Time‐lapse systems for embryo incubation and assessment in assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | OR 0.95 [0.78, 1.16] | 3 studies · 1617 participants | Very low |
TLS with conventional morphological assessment of still TLS images vs conventional incubation and assessment Miscarriage · couples undergoing assisted reproductive technology Time‐lapse systems for embryo incubation and assessment in assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | OR 1.9 [0.99, 3.61] | 3 studies · 826 participants | Low |
TLS with conventional morphological assessment of still TLS images vs conventional incubation and assessment Stillbirth · couples undergoing assisted reproductive technology Time‐lapse systems for embryo incubation and assessment in assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | OR 1 [0.13, 7.49] | 1 study · 76 participants | Low |
TLS with conventional morphological assessment of still TLS images vs conventional incubation and assessment Clinical pregnancy · couples undergoing assisted reproductive technology Time‐lapse systems for embryo incubation and assessment in assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | OR 1.06 [0.79, 1.41] | 4 studies · 875 participants | Low |
TLS utilising embryo selection software vs TLS with conventional morphological assessment of still TLS images Live birth or ongoing pregnancy · couples undergoing assisted reproductive technology Time‐lapse systems for embryo incubation and assessment in assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | OR 0.61 [0.32, 1.2] | 1 study · 163 participants | Very low |
TLS utilising embryo selection software vs TLS with conventional morphological assessment of still TLS images Miscarriage · couples undergoing assisted reproductive technology Time‐lapse systems for embryo incubation and assessment in assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | OR 1.39 [0.64, 3.01] | 2 studies · 463 participants | Very low |
TLS utilising embryo selection software vs TLS with conventional morphological assessment of still TLS images Stillbirth · couples undergoing assisted reproductive technology Time‐lapse systems for embryo incubation and assessment in assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
TLS utilising embryo selection software vs TLS with conventional morphological assessment of still TLS images Clinical pregnancy · couples undergoing assisted reproductive technology Time‐lapse systems for embryo incubation and assessment in assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | OR 0.97 [0.67, 1.42] | 2 studies · 463 participants | Very low |
TLS utilising embryo selection software vs conventional incubation and assessment Live birth or ongoing pregnancy · couples undergoing ART Time‐lapse systems for embryo incubation and assessment in assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | OR 1.12 [0.92, 1.36] | 3 studies · 1617 participants | Very low |
37°C vs any lower temperature Live birth · subfertile women undergoing IVF or IVF/ICSI Temperature of embryo culture for assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 1 participants | Ungraded |
37°C vs any lower temperature Miscarriage · subfertile women undergoing IVF or IVF/ICSI Temperature of embryo culture for assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | OR 0.9 [0.52, 1.55] | 1 study · 412 participants | Very low |
37°C vs any lower temperature Clinical pregnancy · subfertile women undergoing IVF or IVF/ICSI Temperature of embryo culture for assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | OR 1.08 [0.73, 1.6] | 1 study · 412 participants | Very low |
37°C vs any lower temperature Ongoing pregnancy · subfertile women undergoing IVF or IVF/ICSI Temperature of embryo culture for assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | OR 1.1 [0.75, 1.62] | 1 study · 412 participants | Very low |
37°C vs any lower temperature Multiple pregnancy · subfertile women undergoing IVF or IVF/ICSI Temperature of embryo culture for assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | OR 0.8 [0.31, 2.07] | 1 study · 412 participants | Very low |
37°C vs any lower temperature Adverse events ‐ not reported · subfertile women undergoing IVF or IVF/ICSI Temperature of embryo culture for assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Intervention NR Comparator · couples with unexplained infertility Interventions for unexplained infertility: a systematic review and network meta‐analysis (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Intervention NR Comparator · couples with unexplained infertility Interventions for unexplained infertility: a systematic review and network meta‐analysis (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Intervention NR Expectant management · couples with unexplained infertility Interventions for unexplained infertility: a systematic review and network meta‐analysis (2019) · Cochrane | OR 1.64 [0.99, 2.73] | NR | Very low |
Intervention NR OS · couples with unexplained infertility Interventions for unexplained infertility: a systematic review and network meta‐analysis (2019) · Cochrane | OR 0.73 [0.38, 1.42] | NR | Very low |
Intervention NR IUI · couples with unexplained infertility Interventions for unexplained infertility: a systematic review and network meta‐analysis (2019) · Cochrane | OR 1.94 [1.05, 3.57] | NR | Very low |
Intervention NR OS‐IUI · couples with unexplained infertility Interventions for unexplained infertility: a systematic review and network meta‐analysis (2019) · Cochrane | OR 1.3 [0.68, 2.5] | NR | Low |
Intervention NR Moderate/severe OHSS · couples with unexplained infertility Interventions for unexplained infertility: a systematic review and network meta‐analysis (2019) · Cochrane | OR 2.5 [0.92, 6.76] | 5 studies · 958 participants | Moderate |
Intervention NR Expectant management · couples with unexplained infertility Interventions for unexplained infertility: a systematic review and network meta‐analysis (2019) · Cochrane | OR 1.01 [0.51, 1.98] | NR | Low |
Intervention NR OS · couples with unexplained infertility Interventions for unexplained infertility: a systematic review and network meta‐analysis (2019) · Cochrane | OR 1.2 [0.57, 2.52] | NR | Low |
Intervention NR IUI · couples with unexplained infertility Interventions for unexplained infertility: a systematic review and network meta‐analysis (2019) · Cochrane | OR 1.33 [0.67, 3.58] | NR | Low |
Intervention NR OS‐IUI · couples with unexplained infertility Interventions for unexplained infertility: a systematic review and network meta‐analysis (2019) · Cochrane | OR 1.17 [0.64, 2.12] | NR | Low |
Intervention NR Comparator · couples with unexplained infertility Interventions for unexplained infertility: a systematic review and network meta‐analysis (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Intervention NR Expectant management/IUI · couples with unexplained infertility Interventions for unexplained infertility: a systematic review and network meta‐analysis (2019) · Cochrane | OR 3.07 [1, 9.41] | NR | Low |
Intervention NR OS · couples with unexplained infertility Interventions for unexplained infertility: a systematic review and network meta‐analysis (2019) · Cochrane | OR 1.09 [0.38, 3.15] | NR | Very low |
Intervention NR OS‐IUI · couples with unexplained infertility Interventions for unexplained infertility: a systematic review and network meta‐analysis (2019) · Cochrane | OR 0.8 [0.37, 1.73] | NR | Low |
Screening hysteroscopy vs no hysteroscopy Live birth · women with unexplained subfertility wishing to conceive spontaneously Screening hysteroscopy in subfertile women and women undergoing assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | RR 4.3 [2.29, 8.07] | 1 study · 200 participants | Very low |
Screening hysteroscopy vs no hysteroscopy Adverse events · women with unexplained subfertility wishing to conceive spontaneously Screening hysteroscopy in subfertile women and women undergoing assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 1 participants | Very low |
Screening hysteroscopy vs no hysteroscopy Clinical pregnancy · women with unexplained subfertility wishing to conceive spontaneously Screening hysteroscopy in subfertile women and women undergoing assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | RR 3.8 [2.31, 6.24] | 1 study · 200 participants | Very low |
Screening hysteroscopy vs no hysteroscopy Miscarriage · women with unexplained subfertility wishing to conceive spontaneously Screening hysteroscopy in subfertile women and women undergoing assisted reproduction (2019) · Cochrane | RR 2.8 [1.05, 7.48] | 1 study · 200 participants | Very low |