Table 7.
GRADE evidence for the effect of Shen-ling-bai-zhu san
|
Quality assessment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary of findings
|
|
Importance
|
|||
|
No of patients
|
Effect
|
Quality | ||||||||||
|
No of studies
|
Design
|
Limitations
|
Inconsistency
|
Indirectness
|
Imprecision
|
Other considerations
|
RQLQ
|
Control
|
Relative (95%CI)
|
Absolute
|
||
| Effective rate | ||||||||||||
| 14 | Randomized trials | Serious1 | Serious2 | Serious3 | No serious imprecision4 | None | 595/670 (88.8%) | 459/665 (69%) | RR 1.45 (1.22 to 1.37) | 200 more per 1000 (from 152 more to 255 fewer) | Very low | Critical |
| 0.676 | 196 more per 1000 (from 149 fewer to 250 more) | |||||||||||
| Recurrence rate | ||||||||||||
| 3 | Randomized trials | Serious1 | Serious2 | Serious3 | No serious imprecision4 | None | 7/281 (2.5%) | 31/281 (11%) | RR 0.24 (0.11 to 0.55) | 84 fewer per 1000 (from 50 fewer to 98 fewer) | Very low | Important |
| 0.177 | 135 fewer per 1000 (from 58 fewer to 158 fewer) | |||||||||||
| HP negative conversion rate | ||||||||||||
| 4 | Randomized trials | No serious limitations1 | Very serious2 | No serious indirections3 | No serious imprecision4 | None | 207/217 (95.4%) | 170/270 (78.3%) | RR 1.2 (1.11 to 1.3) | 157 more per 1000 (from 86 more to 135 more) | Moderate | Important |
| 0.815 | 163 more per 1000 (from 90 more to 244 more) | |||||||||||
1
Randomized controlled trial design method is not reported.
2
The risk of bias assessment is mostly “unclear risk” because there are not enough details in articles.
3
Studies come from China.
4
There is significant heterogeneity between studies.