SDAC + cathartic versus SDAC for first aid in patients with acute oral poisoning
Patient or population: first aid in patients with acute oral poisoning (not specified or a combination of different drugs) Setting: hospital setting Intervention: single‐dose activated charcoal (SDAC) + cathartic Comparison: SDAC
Outcomes	Anticipated absolute effects* (95% CI)		Relative effect (95% CI)	№ of participants (studies)	Certainty of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
	Risk with SDAC	Risk with SDAC + cathartic
Incidence of mortality	No studies collected or reported this outcome
Incidence of adverse events	Study population		RR 1.46 (0.61 to 3.49)	180 (2 RCTs)	⊕⊝⊝⊝ Very lowa,b,c	We are uncertain about the effect of SDAC + cathartic, compared to SDAC alone on the incidence of adverse events.
	119 per 1000	174 per 1000 (73 to 415)
Incidence and severity of symptoms of poisoning ‐ not reported	No studies looked at this outcome
Duration of toxic symptoms	No studies collected or reported this outcome
Drug absorption	No studies collected or reported this outcome
Incidence of hospitalization	Study population		RR 0.84 (0.09 to 7.46)	64 (1 RCT)	⊕⊝⊝⊝ Very lowa,b,c	We are uncertain about the effect of SDAC + cathartic, compared to SDAC alone on the incidence of ICU admission.
	71 per 1000	60 per 1000 (6 to 533)
Incidence of ICU admission	No studies collected or reported this outcome
*The risk in the intervention group (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; ICU: intensive care unit; RCT: randomized controlled trial; RR: risk ratio; SDAC: single‐dose activated charcoal.
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High certainty: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect. Moderate certainty: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different. Low certainty: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect. Very low certainty: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect.