Cochrane · systematic review · CD004923
Non‐hormonal interventions for hot flushes in women with a history of breast cancer
Rada, G, Capurro, D, Pantoja, T, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2010 · Cochrane Library
Breast CancerAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
4
current version
GRADE rated
4
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 4 · 100%
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.
Questions and results
SoF vitamin E versus placebo
Population: patients with hot flushes in women with a history of breast cancer
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Frequency of hot flushes Number of hot flushes per day ( SoF vitamin E vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 104 participants | High |
Hot flushes score Number of HF x severity (from 1 to 4) ( SoF vitamin E vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 104 participants | High |
SoF gabapentin versus placebo
Population: patients with hot flushes in women with a history of breast cancer
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Frequency of hot flushes Number of hot flushes per day ( SoF gabapentin vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 233 participants | High |
Hot flushes score Number of HF x severity (from 1 to 4) ( SoF gabapentin vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 233 participants | High |