Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

4,752 questions · 6,648 findings · 688 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 1,125 · 16.9%GRADE not reported 670 · 10.1%Very low 1,796 · 27%Low 1,685 · 25.3%Moderate 1,075 · 16.2%High 297 · 4.5%

Ranked among the 5,000 newest matching findings; add words or filters to narrow the search.

X‐ray pelvimetry vs no X‐ray pelvimetry

Perinatal mortality · pregnant women at or near term with fetal cephalic presentations

It is very uncertain whether X‐ray pelvimetry changes perinatal mortality compared with no X‐ray pelvimetry (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Pelvimetry for fetal cephalic presentations at or near term for deciding on mode of delivery 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.53 [0.19, 1.45]
5 studies · 1159 participants
Very low

X‐ray pelvimetry vs no X‐ray pelvimetry

Wound sepsis · pregnant women at or near term with fetal cephalic presentations

It is very uncertain whether X‐ray pelvimetry changes wound sepsis compared with no X‐ray pelvimetry (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Pelvimetry for fetal cephalic presentations at or near term for deciding on mode of delivery 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.83 [0.26, 2.67]
1 study · 288 participants
Very low

X‐ray pelvimetry vs no X‐ray pelvimetry

Blood transfusion · pregnant women at or near term with fetal cephalic presentations

It is very uncertain whether X‐ray pelvimetry changes blood transfusion compared with no X‐ray pelvimetry (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Pelvimetry for fetal cephalic presentations at or near term for deciding on mode of delivery 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1 [0.39, 2.59]
1 study · 288 participants
Very low

X‐ray pelvimetry vs no X‐ray pelvimetry

Scar dehiscence · pregnant women at or near term with fetal cephalic presentations

It is very uncertain whether X‐ray pelvimetry changes scar dehiscence compared with no X‐ray pelvimetry (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Pelvimetry for fetal cephalic presentations at or near term for deciding on mode of delivery 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.59 [0.14, 2.46]
2 studies · 390 participants
Very low

X‐ray pelvimetry vs no X‐ray pelvimetry

Neonatal admission to special care · pregnant women at or near term with fetal cephalic presentations

It is very uncertain whether X‐ray pelvimetry changes admission to special care baby units compared with no X‐ray pelvimetry (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Pelvimetry for fetal cephalic presentations at or near term for deciding on mode of delivery 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.2 [0.01, 4.13]
1 study · 288 participants
Very low

X‐ray pelvimetry vs no X‐ray pelvimetry

Apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes · pregnant women at or near term with fetal cephalic presentations

1 finding from 1 review

Pelvimetry for fetal cephalic presentations at or near term for deciding on mode of delivery 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
0 studies · 0 participants
GRADE not reported

Arginine, glutamine and β‐hydroxy‐β‐methylbutyrate supplement vs placebo

Ulcer healing · people with diabetes and foot ulcers

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

2 findings from 1 review

Nutritional interventions for treating foot ulcers in people with diabetes 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found
Nutritional interventions for treating foot ulcers in people with diabetes 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.09 [0.85, 1.4]
1 study · 270 participants
Very low

Metal-free FDPs (zirconia ceramic) vs Metal-ceramic FDPs

Bridge failure · Adults (18 years or older) needing a three-unit fixed dental prosthesis (FDP)

1 finding from 1 review

Metal‐free materials for fixed prosthodontic restorations 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
12 and 36 months
At 12 months and at 36 months 34 participants were available for analysis. No FDP failure was reported in either treatment approach at either time.
1 study · 34 participants
Very low

Metal-free FDPs (zirconia ceramic) vs Metal-ceramic FDPs

Periodontal/peri-implant status (secondary outcomes) · Adults (18 years or older) needing a three-unit fixed dental prosthesis (FDP)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Metal‐free materials for fixed prosthodontic restorations 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
No data were presented for any of the pre-specified secondary outcomes. The trial registered pocket depth, bleeding on probing and mobility at follow-up visits but did not report the data.
0 studies
No studies found

Metal-free FDPs (lithium disilicate) vs Metal-ceramic FDPs

Aesthetics · Adults (18 years or older) needing a three-unit fixed dental prosthesis (FDP)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Metal‐free materials for fixed prosthodontic restorations 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
No data were presented with regard to aesthetics.
0 studies
No studies found

Metal-free FDPs (lithium disilicate) vs Metal-ceramic FDPs

Bridge complications · Adults (18 years or older) needing a three-unit fixed dental prosthesis (FDP)

It is very uncertain whether metal-free FDPs (lithium disilicate) changes bridge complications compared with metal-ceramic FDPs (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Metal‐free materials for fixed prosthodontic restorations 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
72 months
OR 0.07 [0.01, 0.75]
1 study · 22 participants
Very low

Metal-free FDPs (lithium disilicate) vs Metal-ceramic FDPs

Bridge failure · Adults (18 years or older) needing a three-unit fixed dental prosthesis (FDP)

It is very uncertain whether metal-free FDPs (lithium disilicate) changes bridge failure compared with metal-ceramic FDPs (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Metal‐free materials for fixed prosthodontic restorations 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
72 months
OR 6.86 [0.66, 71.72]
1 study · 22 participants
Very low

Metformin vs megestrol

Hysterectomy rate · endometrial hyperplasia

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings table ‐ Metformin changes hysterectomy rate compared with megestrol (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Metformin for endometrial hyperplasia 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.91 [0.05, 15.52]
2 studies · 85 participants
Very low

Metformin vs megestrol

Abnormal uterine bleeding · endometrial hyperplasia

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings table ‐ Metformin changes abnormal uterine bleeding compared with megestrol (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Metformin for endometrial hyperplasia 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.91 [0.05, 15.52]
1 study · 44 participants
Very low

Metformin vs megestrol

HRQOL ‐ not measured · endometrial hyperplasia

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Metformin for endometrial hyperplasia 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Metformin vs megestrol

Adverse effects during treatment ‐ not reported · endometrial hyperplasia

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Metformin for endometrial hyperplasia 2024 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
Studies not reported
No studies found

Metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) vs Metal implant abutments (titanium)

Marginal bone level change · Adults (18 years or older) with one missing tooth in the aesthetic zone needing an implant-supported single crown

Metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) showed no clear difference in marginal bone level change (MBLC) compared with metal implant abutments (titanium); GRADE not reported.

2 findings from 1 review

Metal‐free materials for fixed prosthodontic restorations 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
12 months · Distal
MD -0.05 [-0.15, 0.04]
2 studies · 47 participants
GRADE not reported
Metal‐free materials for fixed prosthodontic restorations 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
12 months · Mesial
MD -0.39 [-0.43, -0.35]
2 studies · 47 participants
GRADE not reported

Metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) vs Metal implant abutments (titanium)

Periodontal or peri-implant status: gingival recession (REC) · Adults (18 years or older) with one missing tooth in the aesthetic zone needing an implant-supported single crown

Metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) showed no clear difference in gingival/mucosal recession (REC) compared with metal implant abutments (titanium); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Metal‐free materials for fixed prosthodontic restorations 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
12 months
MD 0.00 [-0.22, 0.22]
2 studies · 47 participants
GRADE not reported

Metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) vs Metal implant abutments (titanium)

Abutment failure · Adults (18 years or older) with one missing tooth in the aesthetic zone needing an implant-supported single crown

It is very uncertain whether metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) changes abutment failure compared with metal implant abutments (titanium) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Metal‐free materials for fixed prosthodontic restorations 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
12 months
OR 7.63 [0.33, 177.14]
2 studies · 47 participants
Very low

Metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) vs Metal implant abutments (titanium)

Implant probing pocket depth (PPD) · Adults (18 years or older) with one missing tooth in the aesthetic zone needing an implant-supported single crown

Metal-free implant abutments (zirconia) showed no clear difference in implant probing pocket depth (PPD) compared with metal implant abutments (titanium); GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Metal‐free materials for fixed prosthodontic restorations 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes
12 months
MD -0.22 [-0.60, 0.16]
2 studies · 47 participants
GRADE not reported