Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

258 questions · 305 findings · 33 reviews

No studies found 66 · 21.6%GRADE not reported 45 · 14.8%Very low 85 · 27.9%Low 58 · 19%Moderate 37 · 12.1%High 14 · 4.6%

Intervention not reported

Behaviour: occurrence of violent incidents (to self, others, or property) · people with primary delusional infestation
1 finding from 1 review

CBT vs ALL OTHER PSYCHOLOGICAL THERAPIES

Mental state: General ‐ clinically important change (no improvement) · patients with schizophrenia

CBT showed no clear difference in mental state: General ‐ clinically important change (no improvement) compared with ALL OTHER PSYCHOLOGICAL THERAPIES (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

CBT vs ALL OTHER PSYCHOLOGICAL THERAPIES

Satisfaction with treatment: leaving the study early Endpoint data (events) · patients with schizophrenia

CBT may leads to lower satisfaction with treatment ‐ leaving the study early for any reason compared with ALL OTHER PSYCHOLOGICAL THERAPIES (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Facemask (RME) or modified facemask vs Other non-surgical orthodontic treatments (mini maxillary protractor, Pushing Splints, modified tandem, Reverse Forsus, reverse Twin Block, reverse chin cup, tongue appliance, Frankel III)

Perceived need for surgery in adulthood · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Facemask (RME) or modified facemask vs Other non-surgical orthodontic treatments (mini maxillary protractor, Pushing Splints, modified tandem, Reverse Forsus, reverse Twin Block, reverse chin cup, tongue appliance, Frankel III)

ANB · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

It is very uncertain whether facemask (RME) or modified facemask changes ANB compared with other non-surgical orthodontic treatments (mini maxillary… (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Facemask (RME) or modified facemask vs Other non-surgical orthodontic treatments (mini maxillary protractor, Pushing Splints, modified tandem, Reverse Forsus, reverse Twin Block, reverse chin cup, tongue appliance, Frankel III)

Overjet · Children and adolescents (aged 16 years or younger) with prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion)

It is very uncertain whether facemask (RME) or modified facemask changes overjet compared with other non-surgical orthodontic treatments (mini maxillary… (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Laser therapy vs other treatments

Scar severity ‐ 585‐nm PDL versus TAC ‐ patient self‐assessment of scar improvement of 50% or higher, or patients considering the scar better or much better ‐ hypertrophic and keloid scars ‐ · participants with hypertrophic and keloid scars

It is very uncertain whether laser therapy changes scar severity ‐ 585‐nm PDL versus TAC ‐ patient self‐assessment of… compared with other treatments (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Laser therapy vs other treatments

Incidence and severity of treatment‐related adverse effects ‐ 585‐nm PDL versus TAC: sequelae ‐ hypertrophic and keloid scars ‐ · participants with hypertrophic and keloid scars

It is very uncertain whether laser therapy changes incidence and severity of treatment‐related adverse effects ‐ 585‐nm… compared with other treatments (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Laser therapy vs other treatments

Incidence and severity of treatment‐related adverse effects ‐ 585‐nm PDL versus TAC ‐ mild to moderate pain related to treatment ‐ hypertrophic and keloid scars ‐ · participants with hypertrophic and keloid scars

It is very uncertain whether laser therapy changes incidence and severity of treatment‐related adverse effects ‐ 585‐nm… compared with other treatments (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Laser therapy vs other treatments

Scar severity ‐ 585‐nm PDL versus 5‐FU ‐ patient self‐assessment of scar improvement of 50% or higher ‐ hypertrophic and keloid scars ‐ · participants with hypertrophic and keloid scars

It is very uncertain whether laser therapy changes scar severity ‐ 585‐nm PDL versus 5‐FU ‐ patient self‐assessment of… compared with other treatments (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Laser therapy vs other treatments

Incidence and severity of treatment‐related adverse effects ‐ 585‐nm PDL versus 5‐FU ‐ mild to moderate pain related to treatment ‐ hypertrophic and keloid scars ‐ · participants with hypertrophic and keloid scars

It is very uncertain whether laser therapy changes incidence and severity of treatment‐related adverse effects ‐ 585‐nm… compared with other treatments (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Laser therapy vs other treatments

Incidence and severity of treatment‐related adverse effects ‐ 585‐nm PDL versus 5‐FU ‐ purpura ‐ hypertrophic and keloid scars ‐ · participants with hypertrophic and keloid scars

It is very uncertain whether laser therapy changes incidence and severity of treatment‐related adverse effects ‐ 585‐nm… compared with other treatments (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Laser therapy vs other treatments

Scar severity ‐ 585‐nm PDL versus TAC plus 5‐FU ‐ patient self‐assessment of scar improvement of 50% or higher ‐ hypertrophic and keloid scars ‐ · participants with hypertrophic and keloid scars

It is very uncertain whether laser therapy changes scar severity ‐ 585‐nm PDL versus TAC plus 5‐FU ‐ patient… compared with other treatments (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review