. 2021 Apr 7;9:e11173. doi: 10.7717/peerj.11173

Table 4. Summary of findings including GRADE quality assessment for comparison between olive leaf extract and antihypertensive drugs.

		No. of participants		Anticipated absolute effects^*
Outcomes	No. of participants (studies)	Captopril 12.5–25 mg	Olive leaf extract 1000 mg per day	MD	95% CI	P-value	Certainty of the evidence (GRADE)	Comments
Systolic blood pressure (mmHg)	148 (1 RCT)	72	76	2.2 higher	−0.43 to 4.83	0.10	⊕⊕ $○$ $○$ LOW^a^,^b	Risk of bias: not serious Inconsistency: serious^a^,^b; indirectness: not serious; imprecision: serious^a;
Diastolic blood pressure (mmHg)	148 (1 RCT)	72	76	1.6 higher	−0.13 to 3.33	0.07	⊕⊕ $○$ $○$ LOW^a^,^b	Risk of bias: not serious Inconsistency: serious^a^,^b; indirectness: not serious; imprecision: serious^a;
Total cholesterol (mg/dl)	148 (1 RCT)	72	76	6.3 lower	−12.75 to 0.15	0.06	⊕⊕ $○$ $○$ LOW^a^,^b	Risk of bias: not serious Inconsistency: serious^a^,^b; indirectness: not serious; imprecision: serious^a;
LDL (mg/dl)	148 (1 RCT)	72	76	6 lower	−11.5 to -0.5	0.03	⊕⊕ $○$ $○$ LOW^a^,^b	Risk of bias: not serious Inconsistency: serious^a^,^b; indirectness: not serious; imprecision: serious^a;
HDL (mg/dl)	148 (1 RCT)	72	76	1 higher	−0.79 to 2.79	0.27	⊕⊕ $○$ $○$ LOW^a^,^b	Risk of bias: not serious Inconsistency: serious^a^,^b; indirectness: not serious; imprecision: serious^a;
TG (mg/dl)	148 (1 RCT)	72	76	10.6 lower	−25.04 to 3.84	0.15	⊕⊕ $○$ $○$ LOW^a^,^b	Risk of bias: not serious Inconsistency: serious^a^,^b; indirectness: not serious; imprecision: serious^a;
creatinine (mg/dl)	148 (1 RCT)	72	76	0.02 higher	−0.03 to 0.07	0.45	⊕⊕ $○$ $○$ LOW^a^,^b	Risk of bias: not serious Inconsistency: serious^a^,^b; indirectness: not serious; imprecision: serious^a;
ALT (U/L)	148 (1 RCT)	72	76	1.1 higher	−1.95 to 4.15	0.48	⊕⊕ $○$ $○$ LOW^a^,^b	Risk of bias: not serious Inconsistency: serious^a^,^b; indirectness: not serious; imprecision: serious^a;
AST (U/L)	148 (1 RCT)	72	76	1.9 higher	0.2 to 3.6	0.03	⊕⊕ $○$ $○$ LOW^a^,^b	Risk of bias: not serious Inconsistency: serious^a^,^b; indirectness: not serious; imprecision: serious^a;

Notes.

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
MD: Mean difference

Explanations

small population

wide CI

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