Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

602 questions · 963 findings · 90 reviews

No studies found 118 · 12.3%GRADE not reported 578 · 60%Very low 93 · 9.7%Low 92 · 9.6%Moderate 59 · 6.1%High 23 · 2.4%

Reactive fibre surfaces vs alternating pressure (active) air surfaces

Proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer · preventing pressure ulcers

It is very uncertain whether reactive fibre surfaces changes proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer compared with alternating pressure (active) air surfaces (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Reactive fibre surfaces vs foam surfaces

Proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer · preventing pressure ulcers

It is very uncertain whether reactive fibre surfaces changes proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer compared with foam surfaces (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Reactive water surfaces vs reactive air surfaces

Proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer · preventing pressure ulcers

It is very uncertain whether reactive water surfaces changes proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer compared with reactive air surfaces (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Caries distribution assessment (individual, tooth and surface levels) vs None (descriptive prevalence review; subgroup analyses by urban/rural status, country and year)

Caries distribution (individual/tooth/surface level) · European adolescents aged 12–19 years

Caries distribution was skewed at individual, tooth and surface levels and too heterogeneous to meta-analyze (narrative synthesis of 11 studies; not GRADE-rated).

1 finding from 1 review

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces vs foam surfaces

Proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer · pressure ulcer prevention

Alternating pressure (active) air surfaces showed no clear difference in proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer compared with foam surfaces (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review