Skip to main content

Table 4 GRADE summary of findings at baseline and after the addition of newly located trials

From: LOCATE: a prospective evaluation of the value of Leveraging Ongoing Citation Acquisition Techniques for living Evidence syntheses

Timing RCTs (participants) Anticipated absolute effects (95% CI)
Length of stay, days 		I2 Certainty of evidence Conclusion
Control (range) Intervention
Oxygen therapy vs. control
 August 2018 (baseline) 3 (375) Mean 2.0 to 6.2 days 0.02 more
(0.37 fewer to 0.41 more) 		0% Lowa
⊕⊕⊝⊝ 		May be little to no difference
 March 2019 (added Chen et al. [25] and Ergul et al. [26]) 5 (467) Mean 2.0 to 6.2 days 0.28 fewer
(0.92 fewer to 0.36 more) 		54% Very lowb
⊕⊝⊝⊝ 		Very uncertain
Hypertonic saline vs. control
 August 2018 (baseline) 19 (2377) Mean 1.8 to 7.4 days 0.46 fewer
(0.77 fewer to 0.15 fewer) 		78% Moderatec
⊕⊕⊕⊝ 		Probably reduces
 September 2018 (added Morikawa et al. [27]) 20 (2505) Mean 1.8 to 7.4 days 0.43 fewer
(0.73 fewer to 0.13 fewer) 		77% Moderated
⊕⊕⊕⊝ 		Probably reduces
  1. CI, confidence interval; I2, measure of statistical heterogeneity; RCT, randomized controlled trial
  2. aSerious concerns about the risk of bias (−1): Two of the three included studies are at high risk of bias (selection, performance, detection biases); serious concerns about imprecision (−1): small sample size (<400) and the 95% confidence interval is wide, including the potential for important benefit and harm; no serious concerns about indirectness, inconsistency, or other considerations
  3. bSerious concerns about the risk of bias (−1): Four of the five included studies are at high risk of bias (selection, performance, detection biases); serious concerns about imprecision (−1): the 95% confidence interval is wide, including the potential for important harm; serious concerns about inconsistency (−1): some difference in direction of effects (Ergul et al. [26] showing benefit), minimal overlap in confidence intervals for the two more precise studies; no serious concerns about indirectness or other considerations
  4. cSerious concerns about inconsistency (−1): There is heterogeneity in direction and size of effects that cannot be fully explained by a priori subgroup analyses (by the presence of co-interventions in each group), and several confidence intervals are not overlapping. No serious concerns about the risk of bias, indirectness, imprecision, or other considerations
  5. dSerious concerns about inconsistency (−1): There is heterogeneity in direction and size of effects that cannot be fully explained by a priori subgroup analyses (by the presence of co-interventions in each group), and several confidence intervals are not overlapping. No serious concerns about the risk of bias, indirectness, imprecision, or other considerations
Back to article page

Systematic Reviews

ISSN: 2046-4053