Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

1,149 questions · 1,211 findings · 179 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 175 · 14.5%GRADE not reported 86 · 7.1%Very low 286 · 23.6%Low 341 · 28.2%Moderate 254 · 21%High 69 · 5.7%

ADMG + CAF vs CAF

Aesthetic condition change related to patient's opinion · Adult patients with single (localised) recession-type defects (Miller Class I/II, at least 3 mm)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
Short term (6 to 12 months)
Aesthetic condition change related to patient's opinion: Not reported (SoF 2)
0 studies
No studies found

GTR rm + CAF vs SCTG + CAF

Sites with complete root coverage · Adult patients with single (localised) recession-type defects (Miller Class I/II, at least 3 mm)

GTR rm + CAF showed no clear difference in sites with complete root coverage compared with SCTG + CAF (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
Short term (6 to 12 months)
OR 0.61 [0.30, 1.24]
3 studies · 98 participants
Low

XCM + CAF vs CAF

Attachment change · Adult patients with single (localised) recession-type defects (Miller Class I/II, at least 3 mm)

XCM + CAF showed no clear difference in clinical attachment level change compared with CAF (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
Short term (6 to 12 months)
MD 0.37 [-0.09, 0.83]
2 studies · 104 participants
Low

XCM + CAF vs CAF

Occurrence of adverse effects or postoperative complications · Adult patients with single (localised) recession-type defects (Miller Class I/II, at least 3 mm)

1 finding from 1 review

Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
Jepsen 2013: no differences regarding pain and discomfort between XCM + CAF and CAF (for all defects)
1 study
GRADE not reported

GTR rm + CAF vs SCTG + CAF

Keratinized tissue change · Adult patients with single (localised) recession-type defects (Miller Class I/II, at least 3 mm)

It is very uncertain whether GTR rm + CAF changes keratinized tissue change compared with SCTG + CAF (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
Short term (6 to 12 months)
MD -1.77 [-2.66, -0.89]
3 studies · 98 participants
Very low

EMP + CAF vs SCTG + CAF

Change in gingival recession (REC) · Adult patients with single (localised) recession-type defects (Miller Class I/II, at least 3 mm)

It is very uncertain whether EMP + CAF changes gingival recession change compared with SCTG + CAF (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Root coverage procedures for treating localised and multiple recession‐type defects 2018 · Cochrane All outcomes
Short term (6 to 12 months)
MD -0.39 [-1.27, 0.48]
2 studies · 62 participants
Very low

Intervention not reported

Disability‐worsening Proportion of participants with disability‐worsening at a maximum of five years'

It is very uncertain whether the intervention changes disability‐worsening Proportion of participants with… (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Treatment with disease‐modifying drugs for people with a first clinical attack suggestive of multiple sclerosis 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.88 [0.5, 1.57]
Studies not reported
Very low

Intervention not reported

Relapse Proportion of participants with relapse at a maximum of five years'

The intervention may leads to lower relapse Proportion of participants with relapse at a maximum of five… (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Treatment with disease‐modifying drugs for people with a first clinical attack suggestive of multiple sclerosis 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.35 [0.26, 0.48]
Studies not reported
Low

Double vs single‐injection technique

Primary anaesthesia failure (incomplete sensory block) · Adult patients undergoing hand, wrist or forearm surgery

Double leads to lower primary anaesthesia failure (incomplete sensory block) compared with single‐injection technique (high certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Single, double or multiple‐injection techniques for non‐ultrasound guided axillary brachial plexus block in adults… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.55 [0.34, 0.89]
9 studies · 527 participants
High

Double vs single‐injection technique

Secondary analgesia failure: Intraoperative sedation required · Adult patients undergoing hand, wrist or forearm surgery

Double showed no clear difference in secondary analgesia failure ‐ intraoperative sedation required compared with single‐injection technique (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Single, double or multiple‐injection techniques for non‐ultrasound guided axillary brachial plexus block in adults… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.64 [0.31, 1.31]
2 studies · 129 participants
Moderate

Double vs single‐injection technique

Secondary analgesia failure : Tourniquet pain · Adult patients undergoing hand, wrist or forearm surgery

Double showed no clear difference in secondary analgesia failure ‐ tourniquet pain compared with single‐injection technique (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Single, double or multiple‐injection techniques for non‐ultrasound guided axillary brachial plexus block in adults… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.58 [0.22, 1.52]
2 studies · 104 participants
Moderate

Double vs single‐injection technique

Complete failure of block3 · Adult patients undergoing hand, wrist or forearm surgery

Double showed no clear difference in complete failure of block3 compared with single‐injection technique (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Single, double or multiple‐injection techniques for non‐ultrasound guided axillary brachial plexus block in adults… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.29 [0.33, 5.01]
7 studies · 368 participants
Low

Double vs single‐injection technique

Time to readiness for surgery2 (minutes) · Adult patients undergoing hand, wrist or forearm surgery

1 finding from 1 review

Single, double or multiple‐injection techniques for non‐ultrasound guided axillary brachial plexus block in adults… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
0 studies · 0 participants
GRADE not reported

Double vs single‐injection technique

Intravascular injection · Adult patients undergoing hand, wrist or forearm surgery

Double showed no clear difference in intravascular injection compared with single‐injection technique (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Single, double or multiple‐injection techniques for non‐ultrasound guided axillary brachial plexus block in adults… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 4.15 [0.46, 37.13]
2 studies · 90 participants
Low

Double vs single‐injection technique

Adverse effects lasting more than 24 hours3 · Adult patients undergoing hand, wrist or forearm surgery

1 finding from 1 review

Single, double or multiple‐injection techniques for non‐ultrasound guided axillary brachial plexus block in adults… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
2 studies · 119 participants
Low

Intervention not reported

Clearance of proven sepsis · neonates with suspected or proven sepsis

It is very uncertain whether the intervention changes clearance of proven sepsis (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

One dose per day compared to multiple doses per day of gentamicin for treatment of suspected or proven sepsis in… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1 [0.84, 1.19]
3 studies · 37 participants
Very low

Intervention not reported

Failure to achieve peak levels of at least 5 microgram/ml (measured 0.5 to one hour after administration of any dose of gentamicin) · neonates with suspected or proven sepsis

The intervention probably leads to lower failure to achieve peak levels of at least 5 microgram/ml (measured… (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

One dose per day compared to multiple doses per day of gentamicin for treatment of suspected or proven sepsis in… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.22 [0.11, 0.47]
9 studies · 422 participants
Moderate

Intervention not reported

Nephrotoxicity (End of study period or before discharge) · neonates with suspected or proven sepsis

1 finding from 1 review

One dose per day compared to multiple doses per day of gentamicin for treatment of suspected or proven sepsis in… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
no estimate extracted
8 studies · 348 participants
GRADE not reported

Intervention not reported

Ototoxicity (End of study period or before discharge) · neonates with suspected or proven sepsis

It is very uncertain whether the intervention changes ototoxicity (End of study period or before discharge) (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

One dose per day compared to multiple doses per day of gentamicin for treatment of suspected or proven sepsis in… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.69 [0.18, 16.25]
5 studies · 214 participants
Very low

Intervention not reported

Failure to achieve trough levels of ≤2 microgram/ml ( · neonates with suspected or proven sepsis

The intervention probably leads to lower failure to achieve trough levels of ≤2 microgram/ml ( (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

One dose per day compared to multiple doses per day of gentamicin for treatment of suspected or proven sepsis in… 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.38 [0.27, 0.55]
11 studies · 503 participants
Moderate