evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

135 questions · 142 findings · 44 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 25 · 17.6%GRADE not reported 17 · 12%Very low 21 · 14.8%Low 38 · 26.8%Moderate 25 · 17.6%High 16 · 11.3%

Populations with low socioeconomic status (>=22.4% of the population with low SES) vs Populations with higher socioeconomic status (<22.4% of the population with low SES)

Caries experience (mean DMFT) · Adults aged 19-60 years

Populations with a higher proportion of people with low socioeconomic status had higher caries experience (pooled DMFT 15.99 vs 5.50), and meta-regression associated low SES with higher DMFT (about 10.35 more DMFT per unit; p=0.050); ungraded observational evidence.

2 findings from 1 review

Populations with a low level of schooling (>=33.60% of the population with low schooling) vs Populations with a higher level of schooling (<33.60% of the population with low schooling)

Caries experience (mean DMFT) · Adults aged 19-60 years

Population level of schooling was not significantly associated with caries experience (DMFT) in subgroup meta-analysis or meta-regression; ungraded observational evidence with very high heterogeneity.

2 findings from 1 review

Populations with a lower proportion of university-educated people (<33.78% with university level) vs Populations with a higher proportion of university-educated people (>=33.78% with university level)

Caries experience (mean DMFT) · Adults aged 19-60 years

The proportion of university-educated people was not associated with caries experience (DMFT); pooled DMFT was similar across subgroups and the meta-regression was non-significant; ungraded observational evidence.

2 findings from 1 review

CHLORPROMAZINE LOW DOSE (≤ 400 mg/day) vs HIGH DOSE (> 800 mg/day ‐ all medium term)

Adverse effects: unspecified extrapyramidal symptoms · schizophrenia

CHLORPROMAZINE LOW DOSE (≤ 400 mg/day) probably leads to lower adverse effects: unspecified extrapyramidal symptoms compared with HIGH DOSE (> 800 mg/day ‐ all medium term) (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Prophylactic valaciclovir (lower dose) vs Prophylactic valaciclovir (higher dose)

Adverse effects · Patients being treated for cancer (acute leukaemia; chemotherapy or stem-cell transplantation)
1 finding from 1 review

Vitamin D (higher dose) + micronutrient(s) vs vitamin D (lower dose) + micronutrient(s)

Adverse effect: hypercalciuria As defined by trialists Time frame: 3 months · children under 5 years of age

Vitamin D (higher dose) + micronutrient(s) showed no clear difference in adverse effect: hypercalciuria As defined by trialists Time frame: 3… compared with vitamin D (lower dose) + micronutrient(s) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Vitamin D (higher dose) + micronutrient(s) vs vitamin D (lower dose) + micronutrient(s)

Hypercalcaemia · children under 5 years of age

Vitamin D (higher dose) + micronutrient(s) showed no clear difference in adverse effect: hypercalcaemia As defined by trialists Time frame:… compared with vitamin D (lower dose) + micronutrient(s) (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: Higher bladder volume vs lower bladder volume

Acute and late GI toxicity (grade 2+) · Men undergoing RT for prostate cancer

Summary of findings: Higher bladder volume showed no clear difference in acute and late GI toxicity (grade 2+) compared with lower bladder volume (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review