Table 4.
Summary of findings for the main comparison.
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks (95% CI)∗ | No of participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PASI | The mean PASI in the intervention groups was 1.83 standard deviations higher (0.41 lower to 4.07 higher) | 138 (2 studies) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝ very low1,2,3 | SMD 1.83 (-0.41 to 4.07) |
∗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. Very low quality: we are very uncertain about the estimate. 1Downgraded one level due to serious risk of bias (random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, and incomplete outcomes), and most of the data comes from the RCTs with moderate risk of bias. 2Downgraded one level due to the probably substantial heterogeneity. 3Downgraded one level due to the total sample size fails to meet the optimal information size.