Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

5 questions · 5 findings · 1 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewest Highest certainty Download CSV

No studies found 0 · 0%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 3 · 60%Moderate 2 · 40%High 0 · 0%

Closest answers

The findings closest to your search, judged one by one by TypeSafe's Jev model.

Direct match · question page
- Summary of findings: Hulka clip vs Filshie clip · Failure rate: total (12 months)
  Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 6.2 [0.75, 51.66]
  1 study · 1441 participants
  Moderate
Direct match · question page
- Summary of findings: Hulka clip vs Filshie clip · Technical failures
  Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 1.04 [0.1, 11.33]
  2 studies · 2325 participants
  Low
Related · question page
- Summary of findings: Hulka clip vs Filshie clip · Minor morbidity: procedure‐related injuries
  Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 1.55 [0.73, 3.26]
  2 studies · 2322 participants
  Moderate
Related · question page
- Summary of findings: Hulka clip vs Filshie clip · Minor morbidity: total
  Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 0.14 [0, 7.32]
  1 study · 197 participants
  Low
Related · question page
- Summary of findings: Hulka clip vs Filshie clip · Complaints: postoperative pain (24 hours)
  Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 1.74 [0.99, 3.03]
  1 study · 197 participants
  Low

Summary of findings: Hulka clip vs Filshie clip

Minor morbidity: total · women requesting sterilisation

Summary of findings: Hulka clip showed no clear difference in minor morbidity: total compared with filshie clip (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 0.14 [0, 7.32]
1 study · 197 participants
Low

Summary of findings: Hulka clip vs Filshie clip

Minor morbidity: details ‐ procedure‐related injuries · women requesting sterilisation

Summary of findings: Hulka clip showed no clear difference in minor morbidity: procedure‐related injuries compared with filshie clip (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 1.55 [0.73, 3.26]
2 studies · 2322 participants
Moderate

Summary of findings: Hulka clip vs Filshie clip

Technical failures · women requesting sterilisation

Summary of findings: Hulka clip showed no clear difference in technical failures compared with filshie clip (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 1.04 [0.1, 11.33]
2 studies · 2325 participants
Low

Summary of findings: Hulka clip vs Filshie clip

Failure rate: total (12 months) · women requesting sterilisation

Summary of findings: Hulka clip showed no clear difference in failure rate: total (12 months) compared with filshie clip (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 6.2 [0.75, 51.66]
1 study · 1441 participants
Moderate

Summary of findings: Hulka clip vs Filshie clip

Complaints ‐ postoperative pain (24 hours) · women requesting sterilisation

Summary of findings: Hulka clip showed no clear difference in complaints: postoperative pain (24 hours) compared with filshie clip (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Techniques for the interruption of tubal patency for female sterilisation 2016 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
OR 1.74 [0.99, 3.03]
1 study · 197 participants
Low