Table S3: Lymph node evaluation compared to no lymph node evaluation in patients with rhabdomyosarcoma
Patient or population: Rhabdomyosarcoma Intervention: Lymph node evaluation Comparison: No lymph node evaluation
Outcomes № of participants
(studies)
Follow-up Certainty of the evidence
(GRADE) Relative effect
(95% CI) Anticipated absolute effects
Risk with no lymph node evaluation Risk difference with Lymph node evaluation
Mortality 1239 (4 non-randomized studies)5 ⨁○○○ Very lowa,b OR 0.46 (0.22 to 0.96) 849 per 1,000 128 fewer per 1,000 (296 fewer to 5 fewer)
Mortality - Extremities 537 (1 non-randomized study)5 ⨁⨁○○ Low OR 0.32 (0.17 to 0.60) 769 per 1,000 253 fewer per 1,000 (407 fewer to 103 fewer)
Mortality - Paratesticular 702 (3 non-randomized studies)1,8 ⨁○○○ Very lowa,b,c OR 0.61 (0.20 to 1.88) 919 per 1,000 45 fewer per 1,000 (224 fewer to 36 more)
Relapse 234 (1 non-randomized study)1 ⨁○○○ Very lowa,c RR 0.92 (0.45 to 1.90) 119 per 1,000 10 fewer per 1,000 (66 fewer to 107 more)
*The risk in the intervention group (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; OR: odds ratio; RR: risk ratio
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High certainty: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect. Moderate certainty: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different. Low certainty: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect. Very low certainty: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect.