Gap finder
Search review questions
Each row is one question a systematic review asked: who, what, compared with what, and which outcome, with the effect it found and how certain that is. Words match anywhere in the field.
515 questions in 31 reviews · Fertility Regulation
current versionsNo studies 99 · 19.2%Ungraded 11 · 2.1%Very low 70 · 13.6%Low 147 · 28.5%Moderate 153 · 29.7%High 35 · 6.8%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
| Question | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Levonorgestrel vs Yuzpe Menses ‐ Early · Women seeking emergency contraception Interventions for emergency contraception (2019) · Cochrane | RR 1.15 [0.86, 1.52] | 2 studies · 1310 participants | Low |
Levonorgestrel vs Yuzpe Menses ‐ Delay · Women seeking emergency contraception Interventions for emergency contraception (2019) · Cochrane | RR 1.23 [0.96, 1.57] | 3 studies · 1988 participants | Low |
Mid‐dose mifepristone (25 mg‐50 mg) vs levonorgestrel 1.5 mg Observed number of pregnancies (all women) · women seeking emergency contraception Interventions for emergency contraception (2019) · Cochrane | RR 0.61 [0.45, 0.83] | 27 studies · 6052 participants | Moderate |
Mid‐dose mifepristone (25 mg‐50 mg) vs levonorgestrel 1.5 mg Any side effect · women seeking emergency contraception Interventions for emergency contraception (2019) · Cochrane | RR 0.55 [0.4, 0.74] | 18 studies · 4352 participants | Low |
Intensive counseling vs usual family planning care Continuation of hormonal contraceptive method · Women of reproductive age seeking to avoid pregnancy Strategies to improve adherence and continuation of shorter‐term hormonal methods of contraception (2019) · Cochrane | OR 1.28 [1.07, 1.54] | 6 studies · 2624 participants | Very low |
Reminders (+/‐ educational information) vs usual family planning care Pregnancy · Women of reproductive age seeking to avoid pregnancy Strategies to improve adherence and continuation of shorter‐term hormonal methods of contraception (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Intensive counseling vs usual family planning care Rate of discontinuation due to menstrual disturbances · Women of reproductive age seeking to avoid pregnancy Strategies to improve adherence and continuation of shorter‐term hormonal methods of contraception (2019) · Cochrane | OR 0.2 [0.11, 0.37] | 1 study · 350 participants | Low |
Intensive counseling vs usual family planning care Rate of discontinuation due to all other adverse events · Women of reproductive age seeking to avoid pregnancy Strategies to improve adherence and continuation of shorter‐term hormonal methods of contraception (2019) · Cochrane | OR 0.73 [0.36, 1.47] | 1 study · 350 participants | Low |
Intensive counseling vs usual family planning care Adherence to method use · Women of reproductive age seeking to avoid pregnancy Strategies to improve adherence and continuation of shorter‐term hormonal methods of contraception (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Intensive counseling vs usual family planning care Pregnancy · Women of reproductive age seeking to avoid pregnancy Strategies to improve adherence and continuation of shorter‐term hormonal methods of contraception (2019) · Cochrane | OR 1.24 [0.98, 1.57] | 3 studies · 1985 participants | Very low |
Reminders (+/‐ educational information) vs usual family planning care Continuation of hormonal contraceptive method · Women of reproductive age seeking to avoid pregnancy Strategies to improve adherence and continuation of shorter‐term hormonal methods of contraception (2019) · Cochrane | OR 1.33 [1.03, 1.73] | 2 studies · 933 participants | Very low |
Reminders (+/‐ educational information) vs usual family planning care Rates of discontinuation due to adverse events · Women of reproductive age seeking to avoid pregnancy Strategies to improve adherence and continuation of shorter‐term hormonal methods of contraception (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Reminders (+/‐ educational information) vs usual family planning care Adherence to method use as indicated by missed pills per cycle · Women of reproductive age seeking to avoid pregnancy Strategies to improve adherence and continuation of shorter‐term hormonal methods of contraception (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 73 participants | Low |
Reminders (+/‐ educational information) vs usual family planning care Adherence to method use as indicated by on‐time injections overall · Women of reproductive age seeking to avoid pregnancy Strategies to improve adherence and continuation of shorter‐term hormonal methods of contraception (2019) · Cochrane | OR 0.84 [0.54, 1.29] | 2 studies · 350 participants | Low |
EMLA cream vs placebo Pain during abdominal entry (NRS; higher = more pain) · women undergoing PPTL under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Low |
Intraperitoneal lidocaine instillation vs intramuscular morphine Intraperitoneal pain (NRS; higher = more pain) · women undergoing PPTL under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Low |
Intraperitoneal lidocaine instillation vs intramuscular morphine Adverse events within 48 hours post operation · women undergoing PPTL under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Very low |
Intraperitoneal lidocaine instillation vs intramuscular morphine Number of women requiring rescue medication · women undergoing PPTL under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | RR 0.22 [0.09, 0.54] | NR | Low |
Combination of intraperitoneal lidocaine instillation and intramuscular morphine administration vs placebo Intraperitoneal pain (NRS; higher = more pain) · women undergoing PPTL under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Low |
Combination of intraperitoneal lidocaine instillation and intramuscular morphine administration vs placebo Adverse events within 48 hours post operation · women undergoing PPTL under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Very low |
Combination of intraperitoneal lidocaine instillation and intramuscular morphine administration vs placebo Number of women requiring rescue medication · women undergoing PPTL under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | RR 0.11 [0.03, 0.42] | NR | Low |
Combination of lidocaine intraperitoneal instillation plus intramuscular morphine vs lidocaine intraperitoneal instillation alone Intraperitoneal pain (NRS; higher = more pain) · women undergoing PPTL under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Low |
Combination of lidocaine intraperitoneal instillation plus intramuscular morphine vs lidocaine intraperitoneal instillation alone Adverse events within 48 hours post operation · women undergoing PPTL under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Very low |
Combination of lidocaine intraperitoneal instillation plus intramuscular morphine vs lidocaine intraperitoneal instillation alone Number of women requiring rescue medication · women undergoing PPTL under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | RR 0.5 [0.1, 2.43] | NR | Low |
Combination of lidocaine intraperitoneal instillation plus intramuscular morphine vs intramuscular morphine alone Intraperitoneal pain (NRS; higher = more pain) · women undergoing postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (PPTL) under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Low |
EMLA cream vs placebo Adverse events within 48 hours post operation · women undergoing PPTL under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Very low |
Combination of lidocaine intraperitoneal instillation plus intramuscular morphine vs intramuscular morphine alone Adverse events within 48 hours post operation · women undergoing postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (PPTL) under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Very low |
Combination of lidocaine intraperitoneal instillation plus intramuscular morphine vs intramuscular morphine alone Number of women requiring rescue medication · women undergoing postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (PPTL) under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | RR 0.11 [0.03, 0.42] | NR | Low |
EMLA cream vs placebo Number of women requiring rescue medication · women undergoing PPTL under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | RR 0.36 [0.25, 0.53] | NR | Low |
Lidocaine instillation vs placebo Intraperitoneal pain (NRS; higher = more pain) · women undergoing PPTL under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Low |
Lidocaine instillation vs placebo Adverse events within 48 hours post operation · women undergoing PPTL under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | RR 1.04 [0.4, 2.69] | NR | Very low |
Lidocaine instillation vs placebo Number of women requiring rescue medication · women undergoing PPTL under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | RR 0.27 [0.17, 0.44] | NR | Low |
Intramuscular morphine vs placebo Intraperitoneal pain (NRS; higher = more pain) · women undergoing PPTL under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Low |
Intramuscular morphine vs placebo Adverse events within 48 hours post operation · women undergoing PPTL under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | Very low |
Intramuscular morphine vs placebo Number of women requiring rescue medication · women undergoing PPTL under local anaesthesia Interventions for intra‐operative pain relief during postpartum mini‐laparotomy tubal ligation (2019) · Cochrane | RR 1 [0.81, 1.23] | NR | Low |
Summary of findings: ring vs clip Major morbidity: total · women > 6 weeks postpartum requesting tubal sterilisation Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation (2016) · Cochrane | OR 0.14 [0, 7.05] | 1 study · 545 participants | Low |
Summary of findings: modified Pomeroy partial salpingectomy vs electrocoagulation Minor morbidity: total · women > 6 weeks postpartum requesting tubal sterilisation Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation (2016) · Cochrane | OR 1.6 [1.1, 2.33] | 2 studies · 1905 participants | Low |
Summary of findings: modified Pomeroy partial salpingectomy vs electrocoagulation Minor morbidity: procedure‐related injuries with no additional operation · women > 6 weeks postpartum requesting tubal sterilisation Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation (2016) · Cochrane | OR 0.53 [0.06, 5.11] | 1 study · 1610 participants | Moderate |
Summary of findings: modified Pomeroy partial salpingectomy vs electrocoagulation Failure rate: total (12 months) · women > 6 weeks postpartum requesting tubal sterilisation Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation (2016) · Cochrane | OR 4.47 [0.07, 286.78] | 1 study · 295 participants | Low |
Summary of findings: modified Pomeroy partial salpingectomy vs electrocoagulation Complaints ‐ postoperative pain (24 hours) · women > 6 weeks postpartum requesting tubal sterilisation Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation (2016) · Cochrane | OR 3.85 [2.91, 5.1] | 2 studies · 1905 participants | Moderate |
Summary of findings: modified Pomeroy partial salpingectomy vs electrocoagulation Complaints ‐ persistent pain at · women > 6 weeks postpartum requesting tubal sterilisation Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation (2016) · Cochrane | OR 1.09 [0.88, 1.47] | 1 study · 1610 participants | Moderate |
Summary of findings: tubal ring vs electrocoagulation Major morbidity: total · women > 6 weeks postpartum requesting tubal sterilisation Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation (2016) · Cochrane | OR 0.14 | 2 studies · 596 participants | Low |
Summary of findings: tubal ring vs electrocoagulation Minor morbidity: total · women > 6 weeks postpartum requesting tubal sterilisation Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation (2016) · Cochrane | OR 0.97 [0.5, 1.87] | 2 studies · 596 participants | Moderate |
Summary of findings: tubal ring vs electrocoagulation Technical failures: total · women > 6 weeks postpartum requesting tubal sterilisation Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation (2016) · Cochrane | OR 3.42 [0.59, 19.81] | 2 studies · 596 participants | Moderate |
Summary of findings: tubal ring vs electrocoagulation Failure rate: total · women > 6 weeks postpartum requesting tubal sterilisation Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 160 participants | Ungraded |
Summary of findings: tubal ring vs electrocoagulation Complaints ‐ postoperative pain (24 hours) · women > 6 weeks postpartum requesting tubal sterilisation Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation (2016) · Cochrane | OR 3.4 [1.17, 9.84] | 2 studies · 596 participants | Low |
Summary of findings: ring vs clip Minor morbidity: total · women > 6 weeks postpartum requesting tubal sterilisation Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation (2016) · Cochrane | OR 2.15 [1.22, 3.78] | 2 studies · 842 participants | High |
Summary of findings: tubal ring vs electrocoagulation Complaints ‐ persistent pain at · women > 6 weeks postpartum requesting tubal sterilisation Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation (2016) · Cochrane | OR 1.22 [0.75, 1.97] | 2 studies · 594 participants | Moderate |
Summary of findings: partial salpingectomy vs clip Major morbidity: total · women requesting postpartum or interval sterilisation Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation (2016) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 2198 participants | Ungraded |
Summary of findings: partial salpingectomy vs clip Minor morbidity: total · women requesting postpartum or interval sterilisation Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation (2016) · Cochrane | OR 7.39 [0.46, 119.01] | 1 study · 193 participants | Low |