Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

4,587 questions · 5,761 findings · 495 reviews

No studies found 1,011 · 17.5%GRADE not reported 1,797 · 31.2%Very low 1,100 · 19.1%Low 1,052 · 18.3%Moderate 649 · 11.3%High 152 · 2.6%

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

Chloral hydrate oral (50 mg/kg) vs dexmedetomidine intranasal (3 μg/kg)

Number of children with clinical adverse event: unsteadiness within 24 h after discharge · children undergoing neurodiagnostic procedures

Chloral hydrate oral (50 mg/kg) showed no clear difference in number of children with clinical adverse event: unsteadiness within… compared with dexmedetomidine intranasal (3 μg/kg) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Chloral hydrate oral (50 mg/kg) vs dexmedetomidine intranasal (3 μg/kg)

Number of children with clinical adverse event: crying during administration of sedation · children undergoing neurodiagnostic procedures

Chloral hydrate oral (50 mg/kg) probably leads to higher number of children with clinical adverse event: crying during… compared with dexmedetomidine intranasal (3 μg/kg) (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Chloral hydrate oral (50 mg/kg) vs dexmedetomidine intranasal (3 μg/kg)

Vomiting · children undergoing neurodiagnostic procedures

Chloral hydrate oral (50 mg/kg) showed no clear difference in number of children with clinical adverse event: vomiting compared with dexmedetomidine intranasal (3 μg/kg) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Chloral hydrate oral (75 mg/kg) vs pentobarbital intravenous (5 mg/kg)

Proportion of children who required a further dose of either the same sedative agent or the addition of a different sedative agent · children undergoing neurodiagnostic procedures

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

E-cigarette aerosol / e-liquid exposure (flavored and unflavored; nicotine and non-nicotine) vs Unexposed controls / unflavored e-liquid / conventional cigarette smoke

Cariogenic and commensal oral bacteria (S. mutans and commensal streptococci growth, adhesion, biofilm) · Oral bacteria (streptococci), dental hard tissue (enamel/dentin) and e-liquids studied in vitro/ex vivo (with a few clinical microbiome…

Most in vitro studies indicate e-cigarette aerosol/e-liquid (especially flavored/high-concentration) disrupts normal oral flora and favors cariogenic S. mutans growth and biofilm, plausibly increasing caries risk; not pooled (ungraded, narrative).

1 finding from 1 review

Active rinse (zinc acetate + chlorhexidine + sodium fluoride), with or without tongue scraping vs Negative control rinse, with or without tongue scraping

OLT and VSC scores · Adolescents and adults aged over 16 years with clinical or self-assessed halitosis of oral origin; excluding induced or physiological…
1 finding from 1 review
  • Interventions for managing halitosis 2019 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Ademovski 2012 (4-arm cross-over trial) compared an active rinse (with/without tongue scraping) versus a negative control rinse (with/without tongue scraping); OLT and VSC. The authors did not report the correlation…
    1 study
    GRADE not reported

Protease cysteine + actinidine tablets vs placebo (3 tablets/4 times a day

Volatile sulphur compounds (VSC), gas chromatography · Adolescents and adults aged over 16 years with clinical or self-assessed halitosis of oral origin; excluding induced or physiological…

Protease cysteine + actinidine tablets showed no clear difference in volatile sulphur compounds (VSC), OralChroma compared with placebo tablets; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Lactobacillus beta lactoperoxidase (LPO) tablets vs placebo (3 tablets/4 times a day

Volatile sulphur compounds (VSC), gas chromatography · Adolescents and adults aged over 16 years with clinical or self-assessed halitosis of oral origin; excluding induced or physiological…
1 finding from 1 review
  • Interventions for managing halitosis 2019 · Cochrane All outcomes
    Nakano 2017 (2-arm trial) compared Lactobacillus beta LPO tablets versus placebo tablets (VSC by OralChroma). The trial did not report any usable data and hence could not be included in the analysis.
    1 study
    GRADE not reported

Combined oral contraceptive pill vs placebo or no treatment

Self‐reported pain (dysmenorrhoea) at the end of treatment (continuous data): dysmenorrhoea at 6 months' · women with endometriosis
2 findings from 1 review

Combined oral contraceptive pill vs any other medical treatment

Self‐reported pain (dysmenorrhoea) at the end of treatment (continuous data): dysmenorrhoea at 6 months' · women with endometriosis
2 findings from 1 review

Combined oral contraceptive pill vs any other medical treatment

Self‐reported pain (dysmenorrhoea) (dichotomous data) ‐ reduction of pain to zero at 6 months' · women with endometriosis

It is very uncertain whether combined oral contraceptive pill changes self‐reported pain (dysmenorrhoea) (dichotomous data): reduction of… compared with other medical treatment (very low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Polaprezinc vs Azulene oral rinse

Oral pain · Patients receiving radiotherapy on its own or in addition to chemotherapy to the head and neck region

Polaprezinc led to lower oral pain (severe, > 2 on 0-3 scale) compared with azulene oral rinse; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Combined oral contraceptive pill vs no pretreatment

Live birth or ongoing pregnancy · women undergoing assisted reproduction

Combined oral contraceptive pill probably leads to lower live birth or ongoing pregnancy (COCP + Ant vs Ant) compared with no pretreatment (moderate certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Combined oral contraceptive pill vs no pretreatment

Pregnancy loss · women undergoing assisted reproduction

Combined oral contraceptive pill showed no clear difference in pregnancy loss (COCP + Ant vs Ant) compared with no pretreatment (moderate certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Combined oral contraceptive pill vs no pretreatment

Multiple pregnancy rate · women undergoing assisted reproduction

Combined oral contraceptive pill showed no clear difference in multiple pregnancy rate (COCP + Ant vs Ant) compared with no pretreatment (low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Combined oral contraceptive pill vs no pretreatment

OHSS · women undergoing assisted reproduction

Combined oral contraceptive pill showed no clear difference in OHSS rate (COCP + Ant vs Ant) compared with no pretreatment (low certainty).

2 findings from 1 review

Polaprezinc vs Azulene oral rinse

Disability of oral intake · Patients receiving radiotherapy on its own or in addition to chemotherapy to the head and neck region

Polaprezinc showed no clear difference in disability of oral intake compared with azulene oral rinse; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review