Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

4,678 questions · 4,859 findings · 283 reviews

No studies found 1,225 · 25.2%GRADE not reported 215 · 4.4%Very low 1,241 · 25.5%Low 1,210 · 24.9%Moderate 776 · 16%High 192 · 4%

Intravenous midazolam vs intravenous diazepam

Seizure recurrence within 24 hours · Children with acute tonic‐clonic seizures

Summary of findings ‐ Intravenous midazolam showed no clear difference in seizure recurrence within 24 hours compared with intravenous diazepam (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Intravenous midazolam vs intravenous lorazepam

Additional drugs required to stop the seizure: additional dose of the trial drug required · Children with acute tonic‐clonic seizures

Summary of findings ‐ Intravenous midazolam showed no clear difference in additional drugs required to terminate the seizure: additional dose… compared with intravenous lorazepam (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Intravenous midazolam vs intravenous lorazepam

Seizure recurrence within 24 hours · Children with acute tonic‐clonic seizures

Summary of findings ‐ Intravenous midazolam showed no clear difference in seizure recurrence within 24 hours compared with intravenous lorazepam (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: Bile acid sequestrants vs no intervention

Mean GI symptom scores (during RT) · People with pelvic cancer

It is very uncertain whether summary of findings: Bile acid sequestrants changes mean GI symptom scores (during RT) compared with no intervention (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: Bile acid sequestrants vs no intervention

Acute and late GI toxicity (grade 2+) · People with pelvic cancer

Summary of findings: Bile acid sequestrants may leads to higher acute and late GI toxicity (grade 2+) compared with no intervention (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: Energy‐restricted diet vs no energy‐restricted diet (maternal outcomes)

Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: pre‐eclampsia · pregnant women with GDM

Summary of findings: Energy‐restricted diet showed no clear difference in hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: pre‐eclampsia compared with no energy‐restricted diet (maternal outcomes) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: Energy‐restricted diet vs no energy‐restricted diet (maternal outcomes)

Caesarean section · pregnant women with GDM

Summary of findings: Energy‐restricted diet showed no clear difference in caesarean section compared with no energy‐restricted diet (maternal outcomes) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: Energy‐restricted diet vs no energy‐restricted diet (maternal outcomes)

Induction of labour · pregnant women with GDM

Summary of findings: Energy‐restricted diet showed no clear difference in induction of labour compared with no energy‐restricted diet (maternal outcomes) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Summary of findings: Energy‐restricted diet vs no energy‐restricted diet (maternal outcomes)

Large‐for‐gestational age · pregnant women with GDM

Summary of findings: Energy‐restricted diet showed no clear difference in large‐for‐gestational age compared with no energy‐restricted diet (neonatal/child/adulthood outcomes) (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review