Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

149 questions · 159 findings · 18 reviews

No studies found 21 · 13.2%GRADE not reported 8 · 5%Very low 33 · 20.8%Low 62 · 39%Moderate 29 · 18.2%High 6 · 3.8%

Summary of findings table ‐ Methylprednisolone vs dexamethasone

Clinical improvement: discharged alive ‐ not reported · hospitalised and unvaccinated individuals with a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of symptomatic COVID‐19

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ Methylprednisolone vs dexamethasone

Clinical worsening: need for invasive mechanical ventilation, or death at up to day 28 · hospitalised and unvaccinated individuals with a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of symptomatic COVID‐19

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ Methylprednisolone vs dexamethasone

Hospital‐acquired infections ‐ not reported · hospitalised and unvaccinated individuals with a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of symptomatic COVID‐19

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings table ‐ Methylprednisolone vs dexamethasone

All‐cause mortality up to 30 days · hospitalised and unvaccinated individuals with a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of symptomatic COVID‐19

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings table ‐ Methylprednisolone changes all‐cause mortality up to 30 days compared with dexamethasone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Cyclosporin vs mycophenolate mofetil with pulse dexamethasone

Complete remission · idiopathic steroid‐resistant nephrotic syndrome in children

Cyclosporin showed no clear difference in treatment response at 52 weeks: complete remission (primary outcome… compared with mycophenolate mofetil with pulse dexamethasone (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Cyclosporin vs mycophenolate mofetil with pulse dexamethasone

Partial remission ( · idiopathic steroid‐resistant nephrotic syndrome in children

Cyclosporin showed no clear difference in treatment response at 52 weeks: partial remission (primary outcome 3) compared with mycophenolate mofetil with pulse dexamethasone (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Cyclosporin vs mycophenolate mofetil with pulse dexamethasone

Sustainable remission between 52 and 78 weeks: complete or partial remission (primary outcome 1, 2, 3) · idiopathic steroid‐resistant nephrotic syndrome in children

Cyclosporin showed no clear difference in sustainable remission between 52 and 78 weeks: complete or partial… compared with mycophenolate mofetil with pulse dexamethasone (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Cyclosporin vs mycophenolate mofetil with pulse dexamethasone

CKD or death: 50% decline in GFR by 78 weeks · idiopathic steroid‐resistant nephrotic syndrome in children

Cyclosporin showed no clear difference in CKD or death: 50% decline in GFR by 78 weeks compared with mycophenolate mofetil with pulse dexamethasone (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Cyclosporin vs mycophenolate mofetil with pulse dexamethasone

Adverse effects (weeks 0 to 26): serious infection requiring hospitalisation · idiopathic steroid‐resistant nephrotic syndrome in children

Cyclosporin showed no clear difference in adverse events (weeks 0 to 26): serious infection requiring… compared with mycophenolate mofetil with pulse dexamethasone (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Cyclosporin vs mycophenolate mofetil with pulse dexamethasone

Adverse events: hypertension · idiopathic steroid‐resistant nephrotic syndrome in children

Cyclosporin showed no clear difference in adverse events (weeks 0 to 26): hypertension compared with mycophenolate mofetil with pulse dexamethasone (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

IV cyclophosphamide vs IV dexamethasone and oral cyclophosphamide

Complete remission (no further aphthous episodes to 6 months) · idiopathic steroid‐resistant nephrotic syndrome in children

IV cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in treatment response at 6 months: complete remission compared with oral cyclophosphamide plus IV dexamethasone (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

IV cyclophosphamide vs IV dexamethasone and oral cyclophosphamide

Treatment response at 6 months: partial remission · idiopathic steroid‐resistant nephrotic syndrome in children

IV cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in treatment response at 6 months: partial remission compared with oral cyclophosphamide plus IV dexamethasone (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

IV cyclophosphamide vs IV dexamethasone and oral cyclophosphamide

Complete or partial remission · idiopathic steroid‐resistant nephrotic syndrome in children

IV cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in treatment response at 6 months: complete or partial remission compared with oral cyclophosphamide plus IV dexamethasone (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

IV cyclophosphamide vs IV dexamethasone and oral cyclophosphamide

Treatment response at 18 months ‐ Sustained remission/steroid sensitive relapses Clinical assessment · idiopathic steroid‐resistant nephrotic syndrome in children

IV cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in treatment response at 18 months: sustained… compared with oral cyclophosphamide plus IV dexamethasone (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

IV cyclophosphamide vs IV dexamethasone and oral cyclophosphamide

Treatment response at 18 months ‐ CKD clinical assessment · idiopathic steroid‐resistant nephrotic syndrome in children

IV cyclophosphamide showed no clear difference in treatment response at 18 months: CKD compared with oral cyclophosphamide plus IV dexamethasone (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review