Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Evidence reviews in this project were carefully conducted and summarized. However, the evidence identified for our decision aids was indeed a "scattered landscape" and often poor quality. Facing a high prevalence of low-quality, non-directly comparative evidence for treatment alternatives doesn't mean it is not necessary to choose an evidence-based approach to inform patients. While there is an urgent need for high quality comparative trials, best available evidence nevertheless has to be appraised and transparently communicated to patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Danner et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: