Summary of findings 7. Lanolin versus all‐purpose nipple ointment.

Lanolin versus all‐purpose nipple ointment for treating painful nipples among breastfeeding women
Patient or population: breastfeeding women with sore nipples Settings: 1 hospital in Canada Intervention: all‐purpose nipple ointment Comparison: lanolin
Outcomes	Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)		Relative effect (95% CI)	No of participants (studies)	Quality of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Assumed risk	Corresponding risk
	Lanolin	All‐purpose nipple ointment
Nipple pain Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire scale 0‐45 Follow‐up: 1 week	‐	The mean nipple pain in the intervention groups was 2.51 higher (0.61 to 4.41 higher)	‐	150 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate1	‐
Nipple pain Present Pain Intensity scale 0‐5 Follow‐up: 1 week	‐	The mean nipple pain in the intervention groups was 0.12 higher (0.24 lower to 0.48 higher)	‐	150 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate1	‐
Nipple pain Present Pain Intensity scale 0‐10 Follow‐up: 1 week	‐	The mean nipple pain in the intervention groups was 0.14 higher (0.67 lower to 0.95 higher)	‐	150 (1 study)	⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate1	‐
*The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: confidence interval.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.

¹ Small number of participants.