Comparison #3: Decision coaching plus evidence‐based information vs evidence‐based information ‐ Summary of findings
Unclear values
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extracted1 study · 67 participantsVery low
Findings
What do systematic reviews say?
4,760 questions · 8,065 findings · 1,036 reviews
No studies found 1,686 · 20.9%GRADE not reported 675 · 8.4%Very low 1,953 · 24.2%Low 2,048 · 25.4%Moderate 1,296 · 16.1%High 407 · 5%
Ranked among the 5,000 newest matching findings; add words or filters to narrow the search.
Comparison #3: Decision coaching plus evidence‐based information vs evidence‐based information ‐ Summary of findings
Feeling unsupported
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extracted1 study · 67 participantsVery low
Screws vs fixed angle plates
Function WOMAC function (range 17 to 85) ( · older adults (> 60 years of age) with intracapsular hip fractures; most fractures in the included studies were displaced
1 finding from 1 review
- Internal fixation implants for intracapsular hip fractures in older adults 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyno estimate extracted2 studies · 498 participantsLow
Screws or pins vs fixed angle plates
Function WOMAC function (range 17 to 85) ( · older adults (> 60 years of age) with intracapsular hip fractures; most fractures in the included studies were displaced
1 finding from 1 review
- Internal fixation implants for intracapsular hip fractures in older adults 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes onlyno estimate extracted2 studies · 498 participantsLow
Anti‐IL‐4Rα mAb (dupilumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)
Disease‐specific quality of life · patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extracted3 studies · 784 participantsHigh
Anti‐IL‐5 mAb (mepolizumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)
Disease severity ‐ VAS (range 0 to 10, lower = better) · patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extracted1 study · 72 participantsVery low
Anti‐IL‐5 mAb (mepolizumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)
Extent of disease ‐ CT scan (lower score = better) · patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extracted1 study · 27 participantsVery low
Anti‐IgE mAb (omalizumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)
Disease‐specific quality of life · patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extracted2 studies · 265 participantsModerate
Anti‐IL‐4Rα mAb (dupilumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)
Disease severity ‐ VAS (range 0 to 10, lower = better) · patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extracted3 studies · 784 participantsModerate
Anti‐IgE mAb (omalizumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)
Extent of disease ‐ endoscopic score · patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extracted4 studies · 312 participantsLow
Anti‐IgE mAb (omalizumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)
Extent of disease ‐ CT scan (lower score = better) · patients with chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extracted2 studies · 47 participantsVery low
Anti‐IL‐4Rα mAb (dupilumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)
Extent of disease ‐ endoscopic score · patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extracted3 studies · 784 participantsModerate
Anti‐IL‐4Rα mAb (dupilumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)
Extent of disease ‐ CT scan (lower score = better) · patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extracted3 studies · 784 participantsHigh
Anti‐IL‐5 mAb (mepolizumab) vs placebo (on top of topical steroids)
Disease‐specific quality of life · patients with severe chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps
1 finding from 1 review
- no estimate extracted1 study · 105 participantsLow
Monetary incentives: addition of monetary reward vs usual follow‐up
Retention [ · trial participants being followed up for data collection
It is very uncertain whether monetary incentives: addition of monetary reward changes retention [ compared with usual follow‐up (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
- RR 1.02 [0.96, 1.09]3 studies · 1159 participantsVery low
Non‐monetary incentives: addition of pen vs usual follow‐up
Retention [ · trial participants being followed up for data collection
Non‐monetary incentives: addition of pen showed no clear difference in retention [ compared with usual follow‐up (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
- RR 1.02 [1, 1.05]5 studies · 13013 participantsLow
Maintaining participant engagement: newsletter vs usual follow‐up
Retention [ · trial participants being followed up for data collection
It is very uncertain whether maintaining participant engagement: newsletter changes retention [ compared with usual follow‐up (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
- RR 0.99 [0.95, 1.04]4 studies · 5622 participantsVery low
Maintaining participant engagement: post‐it note vs usual follow‐up
Retention [ · trial participants being followed up for data collection
Maintaining participant engagement: post‐it note showed no clear difference in retention [ compared with usual follow‐up (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
- RR 1 [0.99, 1.01]3 studies · 4698 participantsLow
Reminders: electronic reminder vs usual follow‐up
Retention [ · trial participants being followed up for data collection
Reminders: electronic reminder showed no clear difference in retention [ compared with usual follow‐up (low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
- RR 1.01 [0.95, 1.09]3 studies · 790 participantsLow
Prompts: Telephone prompt vs usual follow‐up
Retention [ · trial participants being followed up for data collection
It is very uncertain whether prompts: Telephone prompt changes retention [ compared with usual follow‐up (very low certainty).
1 finding from 1 review
- RR 1.02 [0.85, 1.22]2 studies · 943 participantsVery low