| 1. Coping with the disease, including depression and anxiety / Depression |
| NMA |
Direct |
Indirect |
| Anticipated absolute effects (95% CI) - Difference |
Certainty of the evidence |
Interpretation of findings |
Number of studies |
Number of patients |
Anticipated absolute effects (95% CI) - Difference |
Certainty of the evidence |
Number of comparisons informing indirect evidence |
Anticipated absolute effects (95% CI) - Difference |
Certainty of the evidence |
| 0.19 [-0.41, 0.79] |
Low |
It may result in little to no difference in depression |
0 |
0 |
[, ] |
N/A |
N/A |
0.19 [-0.41, 0.79] |
Low |
| 2. Coping with the disease, including depression and anxiety / Anxiety |
| NMA |
Direct |
Indirect |
| Anticipated absolute effects (95% CI) - Difference |
Certainty of the evidence |
Interpretation of findings |
Number of studies |
Number of patients |
Anticipated absolute effects (95% CI) - Difference |
Certainty of the evidence |
Number of comparisons informing indirect evidence |
Anticipated absolute effects (95% CI) - Difference |
Certainty of the evidence |
| 0.26 [-0.12, 0.64] |
Low |
It may result in little to no difference in anxiety |
0 |
0 |
[, ] |
N/A |
1.0 |
0.26 [-0.12, 0.64] |
0.0 |
| 3. Qualiy of life / Quality of life (specific-disease instruments) |
| NMA |
Direct |
Indirect |
| Anticipated absolute effects (95% CI) - Difference |
Certainty of the evidence |
Interpretation of findings |
Number of studies |
Number of patients |
Anticipated absolute effects (95% CI) - Difference |
Certainty of the evidence |
Number of comparisons informing indirect evidence |
Anticipated absolute effects (95% CI) - Difference |
Certainty of the evidence |
| 0.26 [-1.4, 1.92] |
Very low |
It may have little to no effect on quality of life (specific-disease instruments) but the evidence is very uncertain |
0 |
0 |
[, ] |
N/A |
N/A |
0.26 [-1.4, 1.92] |
Low |
Footnotes per outcome:
1) a) We rated down the certainty of evidence due to serious risk of bias, and serious imprecision;b) Number of studies included in the network: 30 RCTs; Number of studies directly comparing the intervention with usual care: 0 RCT(s) (N=0); Number of comparison(s) informing the indirect estimate: comparison(s).
2) a) We rated down the certainty of evidence due to serious of bias and serious imprecision; b) Number of studies included in the network: 25 RCTs; Number of studies directly comparing the intervention with usual care: 0 RCT(s) (N=0); Number of comparison(s) informing the indirect estimate: 1 comparison(s).
3) a) We rated down the certainty of evidence due to serious risk of bias, very serious imprecision;b) Number of studies included in the network: 8 RCTs; Number of studies directly comparing the intervention with usual care: 0 RCT(s) (N=0); Number of comparison(s) informing the indirect estimate: comparison(s).
References of studies informing direct evidence:
N/A
|
