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.
915 questions in 93 reviews · Emergency and Critical Care
current versionsNo studies 141 · 15.4%Ungraded 22 · 2.4%Very low 216 · 23.6%Low 272 · 29.7%Moderate 188 · 20.5%High 76 · 8.3%
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
Intervention NR Good neurological outcome · adults after cardiopulmonary resuscitation Hypothermia for neuroprotection in adults after cardiac arrest (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.41 [1.12, 1.76] | 11 studies · 3914 participants | Low |
Intervention NR Survival · adults after cardiopulmonary resuscitation Hypothermia for neuroprotection in adults after cardiac arrest (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.07 [0.95, 1.2] | 9 studies · 3871 participants | Low |
Intervention NR Adverse events – pneumonia · adults after cardiopulmonary resuscitation Hypothermia for neuroprotection in adults after cardiac arrest (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.09 [1, 1.18] | 4 studies · 3634 participants | Low |
Intervention NR Adverse events – hypokalaemia · adults after cardiopulmonary resuscitation Hypothermia for neuroprotection in adults after cardiac arrest (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.38 [1.03, 1.84] | 2 studies · 975 participants | Very low |
Intervention NR Adverse events – arrhythmia · adults after cardiopulmonary resuscitation Hypothermia for neuroprotection in adults after cardiac arrest (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.4 [1.19, 1.64] | 3 studies · 2163 participants | Low |
Summary of findings table ‐ Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) vs conventional care All‐cause mortality: all ECMO studies · severe cardiorespiratory failure and cardiac arrest Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for critically ill adults (2023) · Cochrane | RR 0.8 [0.7, 0.92] | 5 studies · 756 participants | Moderate |
Summary of findings table ‐ Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) vs conventional care All‐cause mortality: VV ECMO subgroup · severe cardiorespiratory failure and cardiac arrest Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for critically ill adults (2023) · Cochrane | RR 0.77 [0.62, 0.96] | 2 studies · 429 participants | Moderate |
Summary of findings table ‐ Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) vs conventional care All‐cause mortality: VA ECMO subgroup · severe cardiorespiratory failure and cardiac arrest Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for critically ill adults (2023) · Cochrane | RR 0.5 [0.18, 1.41] | 1 study · 42 participants | Low |
Summary of findings table ‐ Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) vs conventional care All‐cause mortality: ECPR subgroup · severe cardiorespiratory failure and cardiac arrest Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for critically ill adults (2023) · Cochrane | RR 0.76 [0.52, 1.13] | 2 studies · 285 participants | Moderate |
Summary of findings table ‐ Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) vs conventional care Major hemorrhage: all available studies · severe cardiorespiratory failure and cardiac arrest Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for critically ill adults (2023) · Cochrane | RR 3.32 [1.9, 5.82] | 4 studies · 577 participants | Moderate |
Summary of findings table ‐ Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) vs conventional care Neurologic injury: all available studies · severe cardiorespiratory failure and cardiac arrest Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for critically ill adults (2023) · Cochrane | RR 2.83 [0.36, 22.42] | 2 studies · 286 participants | Moderate |
Higher vs lower FiO2 or targets of arterial oxygenation All‐cause mortality: range 1 mo to 1 y · adults admitted to the ICU Higher versus lower fractions of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to… (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.01 [0.96, 1.06] | 16 studies · 9408 participants | Very low |
Higher vs lower FiO2 or targets of arterial oxygenation Proportion of participants with ≥ 1 serious adverse events according to International Conference on Harmonisation Good Clinical Practice: range 3 d to 180 d · adults admitted to the ICU Higher versus lower fractions of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to… (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.01 [0.96, 1.06] | 17 studies · 9466 participants | Very low |
Higher vs lower FiO2 or targets of arterial oxygenation Quality of life (any measure): range 180 d to 1 y · adults admitted to the ICU Higher versus lower fractions of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to… (2023) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 1649 participants | Very low |
Higher vs lower FiO2 or targets of arterial oxygenation Lung injury diagnosed after randomisation (composite outcome): range 4 d to 23 d · adults admitted to the ICU Higher versus lower fractions of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to… (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.08 [0.85, 1.38] | 8 studies · 2048 participants | Very low |
Higher vs lower FiO2 or targets of arterial oxygenation Myocardial infarction diagnosed after randomisation: range ≤ 90 d · adults admitted to the ICU Higher versus lower fractions of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to… (2023) · Cochrane | RR 0.77 [0.51, 1.15] | 4 studies · 5002 participants | Very low |
Higher vs lower FiO2 or targets of arterial oxygenation Stroke diagnosed after randomisation: range 1 mo to 3 mo · adults admitted to the ICU Higher versus lower fractions of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to… (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.08 [0.72, 1.64] | 5 studies · 6110 participants | Very low |
Higher vs lower FiO2 or targets of arterial oxygenation Sepsis diagnosed after randomisation: range 28 d to 60 d · adults admitted to the ICU Higher versus lower fractions of inspired oxygen or targets of arterial oxygenation for adults admitted to… (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.85 [1.17, 2.93] | 3 studies · 752 participants | Very low |
Oxygenation vs no oxygenation during the apnoeic period preceding intubation Hospital stay · people requiring tracheal intubation Oxygenation during the apnoeic phase preceding intubation in adults in prehospital, emergency department,… (2023) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Oxygenation vs no oxygenation during the apnoeic period preceding intubation Incidence of severe hypoxaemia (SpO2 < 80%) · people requiring tracheal intubation Oxygenation during the apnoeic phase preceding intubation in adults in prehospital, emergency department,… (2023) · Cochrane | RR 0.86 [0.66, 1.11] | 15 studies · 1802 participants | Low |
Oxygenation vs no oxygenation during the apnoeic period preceding intubation Incidence of hypoxaemia (SpO2 < 93%) · people requiring tracheal intubation Oxygenation during the apnoeic phase preceding intubation in adults in prehospital, emergency department,… (2023) · Cochrane | RR 0.58 [0.23, 1.46] | 3 studies · 489 participants | Low |
Oxygenation vs no oxygenation during the apnoeic period preceding intubation Lowest recorded SpO2 (%) · people requiring tracheal intubation Oxygenation during the apnoeic phase preceding intubation in adults in prehospital, emergency department,… (2023) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 15 studies · 1525 participants | Low |
Oxygenation vs no oxygenation during the apnoeic period preceding intubation ICU stay (days) · people requiring tracheal intubation Oxygenation during the apnoeic phase preceding intubation in adults in prehospital, emergency department,… (2023) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 5 studies · 815 participants | Low |
Oxygenation vs no oxygenation during the apnoeic period preceding intubation First pass success rate · people requiring tracheal intubation Oxygenation during the apnoeic phase preceding intubation in adults in prehospital, emergency department,… (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1 [0.93, 1.08] | 8 studies · 826 participants | Moderate |
Oxygenation vs no oxygenation during the apnoeic period preceding intubation Adverse eventse · people requiring tracheal intubation Oxygenation during the apnoeic phase preceding intubation in adults in prehospital, emergency department,… (2023) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 10 studies · 997 participants | Ungraded |
Oxygenation vs no oxygenation during the apnoeic period preceding intubation Mortality · people requiring tracheal intubation Oxygenation during the apnoeic phase preceding intubation in adults in prehospital, emergency department,… (2023) · Cochrane | RR 0.84 [0.7, 1] | 6 studies · 1015 participants | Low |
Intervention NR Outcomes, Time point of assessment · relatives, patients, and healthcare professionals during resucitation Family presence during resuscitation (2023) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Intervention NR PTSD in the relatives IES (0 to 75; > 30 = presence of PTSD) measured at 3 months and > 3 months · relatives, patients, and healthcare professionals during resucitation Family presence during resuscitation (2023) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 493 participants | Very low |
Intervention NR Anxiety and depression in the relatives HADS (0 to 42; subscale score > 10 (range, 0 to 21) = presence of anxiety or depression) measured at 3 months and > 3 months · relatives, patients, and healthcare professionals during resucitation Family presence during resuscitation (2023) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 493 participants | Very low |
Intervention NR Grief in the relatives ICG (0 to 95; > 25 = presence of complicated grief) measured at 12 months TRIG (21 to 105; lower scores indicate higher levels of grief) measured at 3 and 9 months · relatives, patients, and healthcare professionals during resucitation Family presence during resuscitation (2023) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 426 participants | Very low |
Intervention NR Â · relatives, patients, and healthcare professionals during resucitation Family presence during resuscitation (2023) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Intervention NR Survival of patients · relatives, patients, and healthcare professionals during resucitation Family presence during resuscitation (2023) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 493 participants | Very low |
Intervention NR Duration of resuscitation in minutes · relatives, patients, and healthcare professionals during resucitation Family presence during resuscitation (2023) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 475 participants | Low |
Intervention NR Stress intensity in the medical team members VAS (0 to 100; 0 = no stress; 100 = maximum stress)Â · relatives, patients, and healthcare professionals during resucitation Family presence during resuscitation (2023) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 1710 participants | Very low |
Tociliuzumab vs standard care/placebo Clinical improvement D28b · people with mild/moderate/severe/critical COVID‐19 Interleukin‐6 blocking agents for treating COVID‐19: a living systematic review (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.05 [1, 1.11] | 15 studies · 6116 participants | Moderate |
Sarilumab vs standard care/placebo WHO progression score (level 7 or above) D28 · people with mild/moderate/severe/critical COVID‐19 Interleukin‐6 blocking agents for treating COVID‐19: a living systematic review (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.1 [0.9, 1.33] | 5 studies · 886 participants | Very low |
Sarilumab vs standard care/placebo All‐cause mortality D28 · people with mild/moderate/severe/critical COVID‐19 Interleukin‐6 blocking agents for treating COVID‐19: a living systematic review (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.06 [0.86, 1.3] | 9 studies · 3305 participants | Very low |
Sarilumab vs standard care/placebo All‐cause mortality D60 or more · people with mild/moderate/severe/critical COVID‐19 Interleukin‐6 blocking agents for treating COVID‐19: a living systematic review (2023) · Cochrane | RR 0.95 [0.84, 1.07] | 6 studies · 3379 participants | Very low |
Sarilumab vs standard care/placebo Adverse events ( · people with mild/moderate/severe/critical COVID‐19 Interleukin‐6 blocking agents for treating COVID‐19: a living systematic review (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.12 [0.97, 1.28] | 4 studies · 860 participants | Low |
Sarilumab vs standard care/placebo Serious adverse events ( · people with mild/moderate/severe/critical COVID‐19 Interleukin‐6 blocking agents for treating COVID‐19: a living systematic review (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.09 [0.97, 1.21] | 6 studies · 2936 participants | Low |
Clazakizumab vs standard care/placebo Clinical improvement D28b · people with mild/moderate/severe/critical COVID‐19 Interleukin‐6 blocking agents for treating COVID‐19: a living systematic review (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.28 [0.97, 1.7] | 1 study · 152 participants | Very low |
Clazakizumab vs standard care/placebo Clinical improvement D60 or more · people with mild/moderate/severe/critical COVID‐19 Interleukin‐6 blocking agents for treating COVID‐19: a living systematic review (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.28 [0.99, 1.66] | 1 study · 152 participants | Very low |
Clazakizumab vs standard care/placebo WHO progression score (level 7 or above) D28 · people with mild/moderate/severe/critical COVID‐19 Interleukin‐6 blocking agents for treating COVID‐19: a living systematic review (2023) · Cochrane | RR 0.66 [0.43, 1.01] | 1 study · 152 participants | Very low |
Clazakizumab vs standard care/placebo All‐cause mortality D28 · people with mild/moderate/severe/critical COVID‐19 Interleukin‐6 blocking agents for treating COVID‐19: a living systematic review (2023) · Cochrane | RR 0.91 [0.54, 1.55] | 2 studies · 169 participants | Very low |
Clazakizumab vs standard care/placebo All‐cause mortality D60 or more · people with mild/moderate/severe/critical COVID‐19 Interleukin‐6 blocking agents for treating COVID‐19: a living systematic review (2023) · Cochrane | RR 0.77 [0.49, 1.19] | 2 studies · 169 participants | Very low |
Tociliuzumab vs standard care/placebo Clinical improvement D60 or moref · people with mild/moderate/severe/critical COVID‐19 Interleukin‐6 blocking agents for treating COVID‐19: a living systematic review (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.1 [0.81, 1.48] | 1 study · 97 participants | Very low |
Clazakizumab vs standard care/placebo Adverse events ( · people with mild/moderate/severe/critical COVID‐19 Interleukin‐6 blocking agents for treating COVID‐19: a living systematic review (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.12 [0.2, 6.24] | 1 study · 17 participants | Low |
Clazakizumab vs standard care/placebo Serious adverse events ( · people with mild/moderate/severe/critical COVID‐19 Interleukin‐6 blocking agents for treating COVID‐19: a living systematic review (2023) · Cochrane | RR 0.69 [0.46, 1.04] | 2 studies · 169 participants | Low |
Olokizumab vs standard care/placebo Clinical improvement D28b · people with mild/moderate/severe/critical COVID‐19 Interleukin‐6 blocking agents for treating COVID‐19: a living systematic review (2023) · Cochrane | RR 1.1 [0.96, 1.24] | 1 study · 248 participants | Very low |
Olokizumab vs standard care/placebo Clinical improvement D60 or more ‐ not reported · people with mild/moderate/severe/critical COVID‐19 Interleukin‐6 blocking agents for treating COVID‐19: a living systematic review (2023) · Cochrane | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |