Skip to main content

Table 2 Summary of findings’ table

From: Yinzhihuang oral liquid combined with phototherapy for neonatal jaundice: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect (95% CI)

No of Participants (studies)

Quality of the evidence (GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

Phototherapy

Yinzhihuang oral liquid combined with Phototherapy

Total serum bilirubin

serological tests

Follow-up: 0–2 weeks

 

The mean total serum bilirubin in the intervention groups was 50.25 μmol/l lower

(64.01 to 36.50 lower)

 

1478

(7 studies)

very lowa,b

 

Time tojaundice resolution

Clinical observation

Follow-up: 0–2 weeks

 

The mean time to jaundice resolution in the intervention groups was 2.17 days lower

(2.96 to 1.38 lower)

 

636

(6 studies)

very lowa,c

 

Failure of jaundice resolution

Clinical observation and serological tests

Follow-up: 0–2 weeks

Study population

RR 0.21

(0.14 to 0.32)

1088

(11 studies)

very lowa,d

 

204 per 1000

43 per 1000

(29 to 65)

Medium risk population

200 per 1000

42 per 1000

(28 to 64)

  1. Yinzhihuang oral liquid combined with Phototherapy compared to Phototherapy alone for neonatal jaundice
  2. Patient or population: patients with neonatal jaundice
  3. Intervention: Yinzhihuang oral liquid combined with Phototherapy
  4. Comparison: Phototherapy alone
  5. *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)
  6. CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio
  7. GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
  8. High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect
  9. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate
  10. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate
  11. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate
  12. aMost of the included studies were assessed as high risk or unclear risk
  13. bHeterogeneity could be detected with the Value of I squire is 98%
  14. cHeterogeneity could be detected with the Value of I squire is 98%
  15. dClinical heterogeneity might exist for different dosage and baseline characteristics of participants