What do systematic reviews say?

Pharmacological interventions vs placebo/usual care or different forms of intervention

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for sexual dysfunction following stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Pharmacological interventions vs placebo/usual care or different forms of intervention

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for sexual dysfunction following stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Pharmacological interventions vs placebo/usual care or different forms of intervention

• Interventions for sexual dysfunction following stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 114 participants
  Very low

Pharmacological interventions vs placebo/usual care or different forms of intervention

• Interventions for sexual dysfunction following stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 114 participants
  Very low

Oral care interventions (nurse-assisted toothbrushing, oral and pharyngeal cavity rinse, decontamination with antibiotics or antiseptics) vs usual care

• Interventions for improving oral health in people after stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 83 participants
  Very low

Oral care interventions (nurse-assisted toothbrushing, oral and pharyngeal cavity rinse, decontamination with antibiotics or antiseptics) vs usual care

• Interventions for improving oral health in people after stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 38 participants
  Low

Oral care interventions (nurse-assisted toothbrushing, oral and pharyngeal cavity rinse, decontamination with antibiotics or antiseptics) vs usual care

• Interventions for improving oral health in people after stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 83 participants
  Very low

Oral care interventions (nurse-assisted toothbrushing, oral and pharyngeal cavity rinse, decontamination with antibiotics or antiseptics) vs usual care

• Interventions for improving oral health in people after stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 38 participants
  Low

Oral care interventions (nurse-assisted toothbrushing, oral and pharyngeal cavity rinse, decontamination with antibiotics or antiseptics) vs usual care

Oral health care interventions showed no clear difference in presence of related infection: pneumonia (Analysis 1.7) compared with usual care (low certainty).

• Interventions for improving oral health in people after stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 4.17 [0.82, 21.11]
  1 study · 204 participants
  Low

Oral care interventions (nurse-assisted toothbrushing, oral and pharyngeal cavity rinse, decontamination with antibiotics or antiseptics) vs usual care

It is very uncertain whether oral health care interventions changes stroke survivor and providers' knowledge to OHC: knowledge (Analysis… compared with usual care (very low certainty).

• Interventions for improving oral health in people after stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  SMD 0.7 [0.06, 1.35]
  3 studies · 728 participants
  Very low

Oral care interventions (nurse-assisted toothbrushing, oral and pharyngeal cavity rinse, decontamination with antibiotics or antiseptics) vs usual care

It is very uncertain whether oral health care interventions changes stroke survivor and providers' attitudes to OHC: attitude (Analysis… compared with usual care (very low certainty).

• Interventions for improving oral health in people after stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  SMD 0.28 [0.01, 0.54]
  3 studies · 728 participants
  Very low

Non‐pharmaceutical interventions vs placebo/usual care or different forms of intervention

• Interventions for sexual dysfunction following stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 68 participants
  Low

Non‐pharmaceutical interventions vs placebo/usual care or different forms of intervention

• Interventions for sexual dysfunction following stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 68 participants
  Low
• Interventions for sexual dysfunction following stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Non‐pharmaceutical interventions vs placebo/usual care or different forms of intervention

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for sexual dysfunction following stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Non‐pharmaceutical interventions vs placebo/usual care or different forms of intervention

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for sexual dysfunction following stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Non‐pharmaceutical interventions vs placebo/usual care or different forms of intervention

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for sexual dysfunction following stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Non‐pharmaceutical interventions vs placebo/usual care or different forms of intervention

• Interventions for sexual dysfunction following stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 68 participants
  Low

Non‐pharmaceutical interventions vs placebo/usual care or different forms of intervention

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for sexual dysfunction following stroke 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Percutaneous vascular interventions vs intravenous thrombolytic treatment

Percutaneous vascular interventions showed no clear difference in good functional outcome (mRS score 0‐2) compared with intravenous thrombolytic treatment (low certainty).

• Percutaneous vascular interventions versus intravenous thrombolytic treatment for acute ischaemic stroke 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.01 [0.82, 1.25]
  3 studies · 443 participants
  Low

Percutaneous vascular interventions vs intravenous thrombolytic treatment

Percutaneous vascular interventions showed no clear difference in death compared with intravenous thrombolytic treatment (low certainty).

• Percutaneous vascular interventions versus intravenous thrombolytic treatment for acute ischaemic stroke 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.34 [0.84, 2.14]
  3 studies · 443 participants
  Low