Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

3,372 questions · 3,874 findings · 666 reviews

No studies found 431 · 11.1%GRADE not reported 783 · 20.2%Very low 995 · 25.7%Low 909 · 23.5%Moderate 596 · 15.4%High 160 · 4.1%

Prophylactic platelet transfusions with high‐dose schedule vs standard‐dose strategies

Mortality from all causes up to 30 days from study entry · People with a haematological disorder

Prophylactic platelet transfusions with high‐dose schedule showed no clear difference in mortality from all causes up to 30 days from study entry compared with standard‐dose schedule (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

High-frequency sugar consumption (three or more times daily) vs Low sugar intake (fewer than three times daily)

Early childhood caries experience (mean dmft) · Nigerian children with primary dentition (approximately 6 months to 5 years)

In primary dentition, high-frequency sugar consumption was associated with slightly higher, non-significant odds of caries (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.23 to 5.44), with high heterogeneity (I2=83%; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

High-frequency sugar consumption (three or more times daily) vs Low sugar intake (fewer than three times daily)

Dental caries in permanent teeth · Nigerian individuals with permanent dentition (approximately 12 years and older)

In permanent dentition, high-frequency sugar consumption was associated with non-significant 15% higher odds of caries (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.52), with no heterogeneity (I2=0%; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

High-frequency sugar consumption (three or more times daily) vs Low sugar intake (fewer than three times daily)

Dental caries prevalence · Nigerian individuals, including children and adults, with primary or permanent dentition

High-frequency sugar consumption was associated with 18% higher but non-significant odds of dental caries in Nigeria (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.59; I2=36%; ungraded).

1 finding from 1 review

STANDARD‐HIGHER DOSE (greater than or equal to 6‐<10 mg/day) vs ANY DOSE ‐ short term

Leaving the study early: insufficient response ‐ When compared with ultra low dose (<2 mg/day) · patients with schizophrenia

STANDARD‐HIGHER DOSE (greater than or equal to 6‐<10 mg/day) probably leads to lower leaving the study early: insufficient response ‐ When compared with… compared with ANY DOSE ‐ short term (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

STANDARD‐HIGHER DOSE (greater than or equal to 6‐<10 mg/day) vs ANY DOSE ‐ short term

Leaving the study early: insufficient response ‐ When compared with low dose (greater than or equal to 2‐<4 mg/day) · patients with schizophrenia

STANDARD‐HIGHER DOSE (greater than or equal to 6‐<10 mg/day) probably leads to lower leaving the study early: insufficient response ‐ When compared with… compared with ANY DOSE ‐ short term (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

STANDARD‐HIGHER DOSE (greater than or equal to 6‐<10 mg/day) vs ANY DOSE ‐ short term

Leaving the study early: insufficient response ‐ When compared with standard‐lower dose (greater than or equal to 4‐<6 mg/day) · patients with schizophrenia

STANDARD‐HIGHER DOSE (greater than or equal to 6‐<10 mg/day) showed no clear difference in leaving the study early: insufficient response ‐ When compared with… compared with ANY DOSE ‐ short term (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

STANDARD‐HIGHER DOSE (greater than or equal to 6‐<10 mg/day) vs ANY DOSE ‐ short term

Global state: 1. No clinically important improvement ‐ CGI‐I ‐ when compared with low dose (greater than or equal to 2‐<4 mg/day) · patients with schizophrenia

STANDARD‐HIGHER DOSE (greater than or equal to 6‐<10 mg/day) probably leads to lower global state: 1. No clinically important improvement ‐ CGI‐I ‐ when… compared with ANY DOSE ‐ short term (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

STANDARD‐HIGHER DOSE (greater than or equal to 6‐<10 mg/day) vs ANY DOSE ‐ short term

Global state: 1. No clinically important improvement ‐ CGI‐I ‐ when compared with standard‐lower dose (greater than or equal to 4‐<6 mg/day) · patients with schizophrenia

STANDARD‐HIGHER DOSE (greater than or equal to 6‐<10 mg/day) showed no clear difference in global state: 1. No clinically important improvement ‐ CGI‐I ‐ when… compared with ANY DOSE ‐ short term (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

STANDARD‐HIGHER DOSE (greater than or equal to 6‐<10 mg/day) vs ANY DOSE ‐ short term

Adverse effects: 6. Movement disorders ‐ specific symptoms ‐ EPS: unspecified ‐ versus low dose (greater than or equal to 2‐<4 mg/day) · patients with schizophrenia

STANDARD‐HIGHER DOSE (greater than or equal to 6‐<10 mg/day) showed no clear difference in adverse effects: EPS: unspecified ‐ Versus low dose (greater than or… compared with ANY DOSE ‐ short term (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

STANDARD‐HIGHER DOSE (greater than or equal to 6‐<10 mg/day) vs ANY DOSE ‐ short term

Adverse effects: 5a. Movement disorders ‐ specific symptoms ‐ EPS: unspecified ‐ versus standard‐lower dose (greater than or equal to 4‐<6 mg/day) · patients with schizophrenia

STANDARD‐HIGHER DOSE (greater than or equal to 6‐<10 mg/day) showed no clear difference in adverse effects: EPS: unspecified ‐ Versus standard‐lower dose… compared with ANY DOSE ‐ short term (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Prostate cancer · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Prostate cancer: OR 1.04 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.09), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Substantial effect unlikely.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Type 2 diabetes mellitus · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Type 2 diabetes: OR 0.63 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.69), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Sporadic colorectal adenoma recurrence · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Sporadic colorectal adenoma recurrence: OR 0.87 (95% CI 0.57 to 1.33), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Ischaemic heart disease · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Ischaemic heart disease: HR 0.72 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.81), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Breast cancer · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Breast cancer (Premenopausal): RR 1.01 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.06), not statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Substantial effect unlikely.

3 findings from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

All cause mortality · people with chronic kidney disease (predialysis (GFR 15 to 60 mL/min/1.73 m²), HD, PD, transplant recipients)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for All cause mortality, Patients with chronic kidney disease: RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.81 to 0.92), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: No conclusion.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Metabolic syndrome (prevalent) · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Metabolic syndrome (prevalent): OR 0.49 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.64), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.

1 finding from 1 review

Higher circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration vs Lower circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentration

Cognitive function · Adults (general population)

Meta-analysis of observational studies (higher vs lower 25(OH)D) for Cognition: OR 0.42 (95% CI 0.34 to 0.53), statistically significant. Umbrella review outcome-level evidence grade: Suggestive.

1 finding from 1 review