What do systematic reviews say?

Any prophylaxis vs no prophylaxis

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for preventing ophthalmia neonatorum 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Any prophylaxis vs no prophylaxis

Any prophylaxis probably leads to lower any conjunctivitis of any aetiology compared with no prophylaxis (moderate certainty).

• Interventions for preventing ophthalmia neonatorum 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.65 [0.54, 0.78]
  8 studies · 9666 participants
  Moderate

Any prophylaxis vs no prophylaxis

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for preventing ophthalmia neonatorum 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Any prophylaxis vs no prophylaxis

It is very uncertain whether any prophylaxis changes gonococcal conjunctivitis compared with no prophylaxis (very low certainty).

• Interventions for preventing ophthalmia neonatorum 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.79 [0.24, 2.65]
  3 studies · 8229 participants
  Very low

Any prophylaxis vs no prophylaxis

Any prophylaxis showed no clear difference in chlamydial conjunctivitis compared with no prophylaxis (low certainty).

• Interventions for preventing ophthalmia neonatorum 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.96 [0.57, 1.61]
  2 studies · 4874 participants
  Low

Any prophylaxis vs no prophylaxis

Any prophylaxis showed no clear difference in bacterial conjunctivitis compared with no prophylaxis (low certainty).

• Interventions for preventing ophthalmia neonatorum 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.84 [0.37, 1.93]
  2 studies · 3685 participants
  Low

Any prophylaxis vs no prophylaxis

It is very uncertain whether any prophylaxis changes conjunctivitis of unknown aetiology compared with no prophylaxis (very low certainty).

• Interventions for preventing ophthalmia neonatorum 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.75 [0.37, 8.28]
  1 study · 330 participants
  Very low

Any prophylaxis vs no prophylaxis

It is very uncertain whether any prophylaxis changes adverse effects compared with no prophylaxis (very low certainty).

• Interventions for preventing ophthalmia neonatorum 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 0.93
  1993 participants
  Very low

LMWH prophylaxis vs fondaparinux prophylaxis

LMWH prophylaxis showed no clear difference in any VTE compared with fondaparinux prophylaxis (low certainty).

• Anticoagulation for perioperative thromboprophylaxis in people with cancer 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 2.51 [0.89, 7.03]
  3 studies · 1806 participants
  Low

LMWH prophylaxis vs fondaparinux prophylaxis

LMWH prophylaxis showed no clear difference in any Pulmonary embolism compared with fondaparinux prophylaxis (low certainty).

• Anticoagulation for perioperative thromboprophylaxis in people with cancer 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 3.1 [0.13, 74.64]
  1 study · 116 participants
  Low

LMWH prophylaxis vs UFH

LMWH prophylaxis showed no clear difference in any PE compared with UFH prophylaxis (moderate certainty).

• Anticoagulation for perioperative thromboprophylaxis in people with cancer 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.49 [0.17, 1.47]
  14 studies · 5588 participants
  Moderate

Antifungal prophylaxis vs no antifungal prophylaxis

Antifungal prophylaxis showed no clear difference in any serious adverse event compared with no antifungal prophylaxis (low certainty).

• Primary antifungal prophylaxis for cryptococcal disease in HIV‐positive people 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.08 [0.83, 1.41]
  4 studies · 888 participants
  Low

Antifungal prophylaxis vs no antifungal prophylaxis

Antifungal prophylaxis showed no clear difference in any adverse events compared with no antifungal prophylaxis (low certainty).

• Primary antifungal prophylaxis for cryptococcal disease in HIV‐positive people 2018 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.07 [0.88, 1.3]
  4 studies · 2317 participants
  Low

Any prophylaxis vs on‐demand treatment

Prophylaxis regimen probably leads to higher any reported adverse events compared with on‐demand treatment (moderate certainty).

• Clotting factor concentrates for preventing bleeding and bleeding‐related complications in previously treated… 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.71 [1.24, 2.37]
  2 studies · 131 participants
  Moderate

Antibiotic prophylaxis vs no treatment/placebo

Antibiotic prophylaxis showed no clear difference in any adverse reactions compared with no treatment/placebo (low certainty).

• Interventions for the prevention of recurrent erysipelas and cellulitis 2017 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.87 [0.58, 1.3]
  4 studies · 469 participants
  Low

Prophylaxis with standard therapeutic factor concentrate vs pegylated liposome FVIII formulation

• Clotting factor concentrates for preventing bleeding and bleeding‐related complications in previously treated… 2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 143 participants
  Low

Full‐mouth ultrasonic scaling plus photodynamic therapy vs full‐mouth ultrasonic scaling alone

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Treatment of dental and orthodontic complications in thalassaemia 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Low molecular weight heparin vs no thromboprophylaxis

Low‐molecular‐weight heparin leads to lower any VTE compared with no thromboprophylaxis (high certainty).

• Primary prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.57 [0.46, 0.71]
  10 studies · 5743 participants
  High

Unfractionated heparin vs no thromboprophylaxis

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Primary prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Vitamin K antagonists vs placebo or no thromboprophylaxis

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Primary prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in ambulatory cancer patients receiving chemotherapy 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found