What do systematic reviews say?

Summary of findings ‐ Buccal midazolam vs intravenous diazepam

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Drug management for acute tonic‐clonic convulsions including convulsive status epilepticus in children 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Summary of findings ‐ Buccal midazolam vs intravenous diazepam

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Drug management for acute tonic‐clonic convulsions including convulsive status epilepticus in children 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Summary of findings ‐ Buccal midazolam vs intravenous diazepam

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Drug management for acute tonic‐clonic convulsions including convulsive status epilepticus in children 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Summary of findings ‐ Intranasal midazolam vs intravenous diazepam

Summary of findings ‐ Intranasal midazolam showed no clear difference in seizure cessation compared with intravenous diazepam (moderate certainty).

• Drug management for acute tonic‐clonic convulsions including convulsive status epilepticus in children 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.98 [0.91, 1.06]
  2 studies · 122 participants
  Moderate

Summary of findings ‐ Intranasal midazolam vs intravenous diazepam

• Drug management for acute tonic‐clonic convulsions including convulsive status epilepticus in children 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 122 participants
  Moderate

Summary of findings ‐ Intranasal midazolam vs intravenous diazepam

• Drug management for acute tonic‐clonic convulsions including convulsive status epilepticus in children 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 122 participants
  High

Summary of findings ‐ Intranasal midazolam vs intravenous diazepam

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Drug management for acute tonic‐clonic convulsions including convulsive status epilepticus in children 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Summary of findings ‐ Intranasal midazolam vs intravenous diazepam

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Drug management for acute tonic‐clonic convulsions including convulsive status epilepticus in children 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Summary of findings ‐ Intranasal midazolam vs intravenous diazepam

• Drug management for acute tonic‐clonic convulsions including convulsive status epilepticus in children 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 52 participants
  High

Summary of findings ‐ Intramuscular midazolam vs intravenous diazepam

Summary of findings ‐ Intramuscular midazolam showed no clear difference in seizure cessation compared with intravenous diazepam (low certainty).

• Drug management for acute tonic‐clonic convulsions including convulsive status epilepticus in children 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.97 [0.87, 1.09]
  2 studies · 105 participants
  Low

Summary of findings ‐ Intramuscular midazolam vs intravenous diazepam

• Drug management for acute tonic‐clonic convulsions including convulsive status epilepticus in children 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 105 participants
  Very low

Summary of findings ‐ Intramuscular midazolam vs intravenous diazepam

• Drug management for acute tonic‐clonic convulsions including convulsive status epilepticus in children 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 105 participants
  Low

Summary of findings ‐ Intramuscular midazolam vs intravenous diazepam

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings ‐ Intramuscular midazolam changes additional drugs required to terminate the seizure compared with intravenous diazepam (very low certainty).

• Drug management for acute tonic‐clonic convulsions including convulsive status epilepticus in children 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.34 [0.35, 5.13]
  2 studies · 105 participants
  Very low

Summary of findings ‐ Intramuscular midazolam vs intravenous diazepam

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings ‐ Intramuscular midazolam changes seizure recurrence within 24 hours: within one hour compared with intravenous diazepam (very low certainty).

• Drug management for acute tonic‐clonic convulsions including convulsive status epilepticus in children 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.85 [0.27, 2.62]
  1 study · 24 participants
  Very low

Summary of findings ‐ Intramuscular midazolam vs intravenous diazepam

• Drug management for acute tonic‐clonic convulsions including convulsive status epilepticus in children 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 81 participants
  Moderate

Oral vs intravenous acetylcysteine

• Interventions for paracetamol (acetaminophen) overdose 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 66 participants
  Very low

Oral vs intravenous acetylcysteine

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for paracetamol (acetaminophen) overdose 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Oral vs intravenous acetylcysteine

It is very uncertain whether oral changes nausea compared with intravenous acetylcysteine (very low certainty).

• Interventions for paracetamol (acetaminophen) overdose 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 2.71 [1, 7.38]
  1 study · 66 participants
  Very low

Oral vs intravenous acetylcysteine

It is very uncertain whether oral changes vomiting compared with intravenous acetylcysteine (very low certainty).

• Interventions for paracetamol (acetaminophen) overdose 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 2.1 [0.62, 7.12]
  1 study · 66 participants
  Very low

Distraction vs control

• Psychological interventions for needle‐related procedural pain and distress in children and adolescents 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  30 studies · 2802 participants
  Low