Skip to main content
. 2022 Jul 25;12:12002. doi: 10.7189/jogh.12.12002

Table 3.

Summary of findings: Topical emollient application compared to no emollient application in ‘at-risk’ newborns

Anticipated absolute effects (95% CI)
Outcome
Number of participants (studies)
Relative effect (95% CI)
Risk with no emollients
Risk difference with emollients
Certainty
Atopic dermatitis
1988 (11 RCTs)
RR = 0.74 (0.63-0.86)
284 per 1000
74 fewer per 1000 (105 fewer to 40 fewer)
Moderate*
Food allergy
1147 (3 RCTs)
RR = 1.12 (0.84-1.48)
123 per 1000
15 more per 1000 (20 fewer to 59 more)
Low†
Allergic sensitization (food allergens)
1061 (2 RCTs)
RR = 0.97 (0.69-1.36)
92 per 1000
3 fewer per 1000 (28 fewer to 33 more)
Low†
Allergic sensitization (inhalation allergen)
1115 (1 RCT)
RR = 1.47 (0.93-2.33)
51 per 1000
24 more per 1000 (4 fewer to 68 more)
Low†
Skin dryness
52 (1 RCT)
RR = 0.41 (0.12-1.36)
296 per 1000
175 fewer per 1000 (261 fewer to 107 more)
Very low‡
Skin rash 118 (1 RCT) RR = 0.86 (0.31-2.40) 119 per 1000 17 fewer per 1000 (82 fewer to 166 more)
Very low‡

CI – confidence interval, RCT – randomized controlled trial, RR – relative risk

*Downgraded by one level due to serious risk of bias (most of the pooled effect provided by studies at moderate risk of bias).

†Downgraded by two levels due to serious risk of bias (most of the pooled effect provided by studies at moderate risk of bias) and serious imprecision (wide confidence interval crossing the line of no effect).

‡Downgraded by three levels due to very serious risk of bias (most of the pooled effect provided by studies at high risk of bias) and serious imprecision (wide confidence interval crossing the line of no effect and less than 30 events and less than 300 participants).