Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

88 questions · 88 findings · 12 reviews

No studies found 4 · 4.5%GRADE not reported 7 · 8%Very low 30 · 34.1%Low 16 · 18.2%Moderate 21 · 23.9%High 10 · 11.4%

Summary of findings table (sensitivity analysis): interventions esophageal and GE‐junction carcinoma vs gastric carcinoma

Studies with gastric cancer participants in addition to eligible participants · palliative participants with esophageal and GE‐junction carcinoma or gastric carcinoma

Summary of findings table (sensitivity analysis): interventions… showed no clear difference in studies with gastric cancer participants in addition to eligible… compared with gastric carcinoma; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table (sensitivity analysis): interventions esophageal and GE‐junction carcinoma vs gastric carcinoma

Sensitivity analysis, meta‐regression analysis, first part · palliative participants with esophageal and GE‐junction carcinoma or gastric carcinoma

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings table (sensitivity analysis): interventions… changes sensitivity analysis, meta‐regression analysis, first part compared with gastric carcinoma (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table (sensitivity analysis): interventions esophageal and GE‐junction carcinoma vs gastric carcinoma

Sensitivity analysis, only esophageal and GE‐junction cancer participants · palliative participants with esophageal and GE‐junction carcinoma or gastric carcinoma

Summary of findings table (sensitivity analysis): interventions… led to lower sensitivity analysis, only esophageal and GE‐junction cancer… compared with gastric carcinoma; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table (sensitivity analysis): interventions esophageal and GE‐junction carcinoma vs gastric carcinoma

Sensitivity analysis, only gastric cancer participants · palliative participants with esophageal and GE‐junction carcinoma or gastric carcinoma

Summary of findings table (sensitivity analysis): interventions… showed no clear difference in sensitivity analysis, only gastric cancer participants compared with gastric carcinoma; GRADE not reported.

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table (sensitivity analysis): interventions esophageal and GE‐junction carcinoma vs gastric carcinoma

Sensitivity analysis, meta‐regression analysis, second part · palliative participants with esophageal and GE‐junction carcinoma or gastric carcinoma

Summary of findings table (sensitivity analysis): interventions… probably leads to lower sensitivity analysis, meta‐regression analysis, second part compared with gastric carcinoma (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

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

Proportion with zero bleeds · people without inhibitors

Summary of findings table ‐ Emicuzimab 1.5 mg/kg weekly prophylaxis may leads to higher 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

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 ‐ CBT without antipsychotics vs antipsychotics

Risk for at least one adverse event per patient · schizophrenia

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings table ‐ CBT without antipsychotics changes adverse events ‐ Participants with at least one AE (separated time… compared with antipsychotics (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ CBT without antipsychotics vs CBT plus antipsychotics

Global state ‐ number of participants with relapse/exacerbations of psychosis (separated time points) ‐ < 12 months · schizophrenia

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings table ‐ CBT without antipsychotics changes global state ‐ number of participants with relapse/exacerbations of… compared with CBT plus antipsychotics (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ CBT without antipsychotics vs CBT plus antipsychotics

Risk for at least one adverse event per patient · schizophrenia

Summary of findings table ‐ CBT without antipsychotics may leads to lower adverse events ‐ Participants with at least one AE (separated time… compared with CBT plus antipsychotics (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ CBT without antipsychotics vs no specific treatment

Global state ‐ number of participants with relapse/exacerbations of psychosis (separated time points) ‐ > 1 year · schizophrenia

Summary of findings table ‐ CBT without antipsychotics showed no clear difference in global state ‐ number of participants with relapse/exacerbations of… compared with no specific treatment (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review