Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

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

19 questions · 19 findings · 2 reviews

No studies found 16 · 84.2%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 2 · 10.5%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 1 · 5.3%High 0 · 0%

Training, monitoring and observation vs monitoring and observation

Proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer · staff caring for patients at risk of pressure ulcers

It is very uncertain whether training, monitoring and observation changes incidence of new pressure ulcers compared with monitoring and observation (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Training, monitoring and observation vs observation

Proportion of participants developing a new pressure ulcer · staff caring for patients at risk of pressure ulcers

It is very uncertain whether training, monitoring and observation changes incidence of new pressure ulcers compared with observation alone (very low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Monitoring (any means of observation, supervision, keeping under review, measuring or testing at intervals) vs No monitoring

Oral health: Not brushing teeth twice a day · People with serious mental illness (all included participants had schizophrenia); majority aged 18 to 65 years per NIMH 1987, or with…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Monitoring (any means of observation, supervision, keeping under review, measuring or testing at intervals) vs No monitoring

Oral health: Not having seen a dentist in the past year · People with serious mental illness (all included participants had schizophrenia); majority aged 18 to 65 years per NIMH 1987, or with…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Monitoring (any means of observation, supervision, keeping under review, measuring or testing at intervals) vs No monitoring

Quality of life: Chronic pain · People with serious mental illness (all included participants had schizophrenia); majority aged 18 to 65 years per NIMH 1987, or with…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Monitoring (any means of observation, supervision, keeping under review, measuring or testing at intervals) vs No monitoring

Service use: Emergency medical/dental treatment · People with serious mental illness (all included participants had schizophrenia); majority aged 18 to 65 years per NIMH 1987, or with…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Monitoring (any means of observation, supervision, keeping under review, measuring or testing at intervals) vs No monitoring

Adverse events: Clinically important specific adverse events · People with serious mental illness (all included participants had schizophrenia); majority aged 18 to 65 years per NIMH 1987, or with…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Monitoring (any means of observation, supervision, keeping under review, measuring or testing at intervals) vs No monitoring

Dental state: No clinically important change in plaque index · People with serious mental illness (all included participants had schizophrenia); majority aged 18 to 65 years per NIMH 1987, or with…

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

1 finding from 1 review

Monitoring (any means of observation, supervision, keeping under review, measuring or testing at intervals) vs No monitoring

Leaving the study early · People with serious mental illness (all included participants had schizophrenia); majority aged 18 to 65 years per NIMH 1987, or with…

Monitoring (any means of observation, supervision, keeping under… showed no clear difference in leaving the study early compared with no monitoring (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review