evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

690 questions · 711 findings · 93 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 167 · 23.5%GRADE not reported 36 · 5.1%Very low 181 · 25.5%Low 202 · 28.4%Moderate 100 · 14.1%High 25 · 3.5%

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 1.5 mg/kg weekly prophylaxis vs on‐demand therapy

All adverse events · people without inhibitors

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 1.5 mg/kg weekly prophylaxis probably leads to higher all adverse events compared with on‐demand therapy (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 1.5 mg/kg weekly prophylaxis vs on‐demand therapy

Serious adverse events · people without inhibitors

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 1.5 mg/kg weekly prophylaxis showed no clear difference in serious adverse events compared with on‐demand therapy (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: intravitreal bevacizumab plus intravitreal steroid vs intravitreal anti‐VEGF

Significant intraocular inflammation at · adults with centre‐involving diabetic macular oedema

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings: intravitreal anti‐VEGF plus intravitreal steroid changes significant intraocular inflammation at compared with intravitreal anti‐VEGF (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: intravitreal bevacizumab plus intravitreal steroid vs intravitreal anti‐VEGF

Raised Intraocular Pressure at · adults with centre‐involving diabetic macular oedema

Summary of findings: intravitreal anti‐VEGF plus intravitreal steroid probably leads to higher raised intraocular pressure at compared with intravitreal anti‐VEGF (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: intravitreal bevacizumab plus intravitreal steroid vs intravitreal anti‐VEGF

Systemic adverse events at · adults with centre‐involving diabetic macular oedema

Summary of findings: intravitreal anti‐VEGF plus intravitreal steroid showed no clear difference in systemic adverse events at compared with intravitreal anti‐VEGF (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 3.0 mg/kg bi‐weekly prophylaxis vs on‐demand therapy

Proportion with zero bleeds · people without inhibitors

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 3.0 mg/kg bi‐weekly prophylaxis showed no clear difference in proportion of participants with zero bleeds compared with on‐demand therapy (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 3.0 mg/kg bi‐weekly prophylaxis vs on‐demand therapy

All adverse events · people without inhibitors

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 3.0 mg/kg bi‐weekly prophylaxis probably leads to higher all adverse events compared with on‐demand therapy (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 3.0 mg/kg bi‐weekly prophylaxis vs on‐demand therapy

Serious adverse events · people without inhibitors

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 3.0 mg/kg bi‐weekly prophylaxis showed no clear difference in serious adverse events compared with on‐demand therapy (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: intravitreal bevacizumab plus intravitreal steroid vs macular laser

Raised Intraocular Pressure at · adults with centre‐involving diabetic macular oedema

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings: intravitreal bevacizumab plus intravitreal… changes raised Intraocular Pressure at compared with macular laser (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review