Long COVID Definitions and Models of Care : A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Definitions of long COVID are evolving, and optimal models of care are uncertain. PURPOSE: To perform a scoping review on definitions of long COVID and provide an overview of care models, including a proposed framework to describe and distinguish models. DATA SOURCES: English-language articles from Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, SocINDEX, Scopus, Embase, and CINAHL published between January 2021 and November 2023; gray literature; and discussions with 18 key informants. STUDY SELECTION: Publications describing long COVID definitions or models of care, supplemented by models described by key informants. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted by one reviewer and verified for accuracy by another reviewer. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 1960 screened citations, 38 were included. Five clinical definitions of long COVID varied with regard to timing since symptom onset and the minimum duration required for diagnosis; 1 additional definition was symptom score-based. Forty-nine long COVID care models were informed by 5 key principles: a core "lead" team, multidisciplinary expertise, comprehensive access to diagnostic and therapeutic services, a patient-centered approach, and providing capacity to meet demand. Seven characteristics provided a framework for distinguishing models: home department or clinical setting, clinical lead, collocation of other specialties, primary care role, population managed, use of teleservices, and whether the model was practice- or systems-based. Using this framework, 10 representative practice-based and 3 systems-based models of care were identified. LIMITATIONS: Published literature often lacked key model details, data were insufficient to assess model outcomes, and there was overlap between and variability within models. CONCLUSION: Definitions of long COVID and care models are evolving. Research is needed to optimize models and evaluate outcomes of different models. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (Protocol posted at https://effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/products/long-covid-models-care/protocol.).

Major Update: Masks for Prevention of SARS-CoV-2 in Health Care and Community Settings-Final Update of a Living, Rapid Review.

BACKGROUND: Optimal use of masks for preventing COVID-19 is unclear. PURPOSE: To update an evidence synthesis on N95, surgical, and cloth mask effectiveness in community and health care settings for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, medRxiv (3 June 2022 to 2 January 2023), and reference lists. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized trials of interventions to increase mask use and risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection and observational studies of mask use that controlled for potential confounders. DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators sequentially abstracted study data and rated quality. DATA SYNTHESIS: Three randomized trials and 21 observational studies were included. In community settings, mask use may be associated with a small reduced risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection versus no mask use, on the basis of 2 randomized trials and 7 observational studies. In routine patient care settings, surgical masks and N95 respirators may be associated with similar risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection, on the basis of 1 new randomized trial with some imprecision and 4 observational studies. Evidence from observational studies was insufficient to evaluate other mask comparisons due to methodological limitations and inconsistency. LIMITATION: Few randomized trials, studies had methodological limitations and some imprecision, suboptimal adherence and pragmatic aspects of randomized trials potentially attenuated benefits, very limited evidence on harms, uncertain applicability to Omicron variant predominant era, meta-analysis not done due to heterogeneity, unable to formally assess for publication bias, and restricted to English-language articles. CONCLUSION: Updated evidence suggests that masks may be associated with a small reduction in risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection in community settings. Surgical masks and N95 respirators may be associated with similar infection risk in routine patient care settings, but a beneficial effect of N95 respirators cannot be ruled out. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None.

Ultrasound Follow-Up of Benign Thyroid Nodules: A Scoping Review.

Background: For cytologically benign thyroid nodules with very low to intermediate suspicion ultrasound patterns, optimal ultrasound follow-up intervals and outcomes of discontinuing follow-up are unclear. Methods: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central were searched through August 2022 for studies comparing different ultrasound follow-up intervals and discontinuation versus continuation of ultrasound follow-up. The population was patients with cytologically benign thyroid nodules and very low to intermediate suspicion ultrasound patterns, and the primary outcome was missed thyroid cancers. Utilizing a scoping approach, we also included studies that were not restricted to very low to intermediate suspicion ultrasound patterns or evaluated additional outcomes such as thyroid cancer-related mortality rate, nodule growth, and subsequent procedures. Quality assessment was performed, and evidence was synthesized qualitatively. Results: One retrospective cohort study (n = 1254; 1819 nodules) compared different first follow-up ultrasound intervals for cytologically benign thyroid nodules. There was no difference between >4- versus 1- to 2-year intervals to first follow-up ultrasound in the likelihood of malignancy (0.4% [1/223] vs. 0.3% [2/715]), and no cancer-related deaths occurred. Follow-up ultrasound at >4 years was associated with increased likelihood of ≥50% nodule growth (35.0% [78/223] vs. 15.1% [108/715]), repeat fine needle aspiration (19.3% [43/223] vs. 5.6% [40/715]), and thyroidectomy (4.0% [9/223] vs. 0.8% [6/715]). The study did not describe ultrasound patterns or control for confounders, and analyses were based on interval to first follow-up ultrasound only. Other methodological limitations were not controlling for variability in follow-up duration and unclear attrition. The certainty of evidence was very low. No study compared discontinuation of ultrasound follow-up versus continuation. Conclusions: This scoping review found that evidence comparing different ultrasound follow-up intervals in patients with benign thyroid nodules is limited to one observational study, but suggests that the subsequent development of thyroid malignancies is very uncommon regardless of follow-up interval. Longer follow-up may be associated with more repeat biopsies and thyroidectomies, which could be related to more interval nodule growth that meets thresholds for further evaluation. Research is needed to clarify optimal ultrasound follow-up intervals for low to intermediate suspicion cytologically benign thyroid nodules and outcomes of discontinuing ultrasound follow-up for very low suspicion nodules.

Systemic corticosteroids for radicular and non-radicular low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids are medications with anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressant properties. Systemic corticosteroids administered through the oral, intravenous, or intramuscular routes have been used to treat various types of low back pain, including radicular back pain (not due to spinal stenosis), non-radicular back pain, and spinal stenosis. However, there is uncertainty about the benefits and harms of systemic corticosteroids for low back pain. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of systemic corticosteroids versus placebo or no corticosteroid for radicular low back pain, non-radicular low back pain, and symptomatic spinal stenosis in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was September 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized and quasi-randomized trials in adults of systematic corticosteroids versus placebo or no corticosteroid. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. The major outcomes were pain, function, need for surgery, serious adverse effect, and presence of hyperglycemia. The minor outcomes were quality of life, successful outcomes, non-serious adverse events, and withdrawal due to adverse events. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: Thirteen trials (1047 participants) met the inclusion criteria. Nine trials included participants with radicular low back pain, two trial with low back pain, and two trials with spinal stenosis. All trials blinded participants to receipt of systemic corticosteroids. Seven trials were at low risk of bias, five at unclear risk, and one at high risk of selection bias. Two trials were at high risk of attrition bias. Doses and duration of systemic corticosteroid therapy varied. Radicular low back pain For radicular low back pain, moderate-certainty evidence indicated that systemic corticosteroids probably slightly decrease pain versus placebo at short-term follow-up (mean difference (MD) 0.56 points better, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 0.04 on a 0 to 10 scale) and may slightly increase the likelihood of experiencing improvement in pain at short-term follow-up (risk ratio (RR) 1.21, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.66; absolute effect 5% better (95% CI 5% worse to 15% better). Systemic corticosteroids may not improve function at short-term follow-up (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.14 better; range 0.49 better to 0.21 worse) and probably increase the likelihood of improvement in function at short-term follow-up (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.22 to 1.91; absolute effect 19% better, 95% CI 8% better to 30% better). Systemic corticosteroids were associated with greater improvement in function versus placebo at long-term follow-up (MD -7.40, 95% CI -12.55 to -2.25 on the 0 to 100 Oswestry Disability Index) and greater likelihood of functional improvement (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.56), based on a single trial. There was no difference in likelihood of surgery (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.47). Evidence indicated that systemic corticosteroids (administered as a single dose or as a short course of therapy) are not associated with increased risk of any adverse event, serious adverse events, withdrawal due to adverse events, or hyperglycemia, but estimates were imprecise as some trials did not report harms, and harms reporting was suboptimal in trials that did provide data. Limitations included variability across trials in interventions (e.g. corticosteroid used, dose and duration of treatment), clinical settings, and participants (e.g. duration of symptoms, methods for diagnosis); limited utility of subgroup analyses due to small numbers of trials; methodologic limitations or suboptimal reporting of methods by some trials; and too few trials to formally assess for publication bias using graphical or statistical tests for small sample effects. Non-radicular low back pain Evidence on systemic corticosteroids versus placebo for non-radicular pain was limited and suggested that systemic corticosteroids may be associated with slightly worse short-term pain but slightly better function. Spinal stenosis For spinal stenosis, limited evidence indicated that systemic corticosteroids are probably no more effective than placebo for short-term pain or function. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Systemic corticosteroids appear to be slightly effective at improving short-term pain and function in people with radicular low back pain not due to spinal stenosis, and might slightly improve long-term function. The effects of systemic corticosteroids in people with non-radicular low back pain are unclear and systemic corticosteroids are probably ineffective for spinal stenosis. A single dose or short course of systemic corticosteroids for low back pain does not appear to cause serious harms, but evidence is limited.

Statin Use for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Adults: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: A 2016 review for the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) found use of statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) was associated with reduced mortality and cardiovascular outcomes. Objective: To update the 2016 review on statins for primary prevention of CVD to inform the USPSTF. Data Sources: Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (to November 2021); surveillance through May 20, 2022. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials on statins vs placebo or no statin and statin intensity in adults without prior cardiovascular events; large cohort studies on harms. Data Extraction and Synthesis: One investigator abstracted data; a second checked accuracy. Two investigators independently rated study quality. Main Outcomes and Measures: All-cause and cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, composite cardiovascular outcomes, and adverse events. Results: Twenty-six studies were included: 22 trials (N = 90 624) with 6 months to 6 years of follow-up compared statins vs placebo or no statin, 1 trial (n = 5144) compared statin intensities, and 3 observational studies (n = 417 523) reported harms. Statins were significantly associated with decreased risk of all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR], 0.92 [95% CI, 0.87 to 0.98]; absolute risk difference [ARD], -0.35% [95% CI, -0.57% to -0.14%]), stroke (RR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.68 to 0.90]; ARD, -0.39% [95% CI, -0.54% to -0.25%]), myocardial infarction (RR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.60 to 0.75]; ARD, -0.85% [95% CI, -1.22% to -0.47%]), and composite cardiovascular outcomes (RR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.64 to 0.81]; ARD, -1.28% [95% CI, -1.61% to -0.95%]); the association with cardiovascular mortality was not statistically significant (RR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.81 to 1.02]; ARD, -0.13%). Relative benefits were consistent in groups defined by demographic and clinical characteristics, although data for persons older than 75 years were sparse. Statin therapy was not significantly associated with increased risk of serious adverse events (RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.93 to 1.01]), myalgias (RR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.86 to 1.11]), or elevated alanine aminotransferase level (RR, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.78 to 1.13]). Statin therapy was not significantly associated with increased diabetes risk overall (RR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.92 to 1.19]), although 1 trial found high-intensity statin therapy was significantly associated with increased risk (RR, 1.25 [95% CI, 1.05 to 1.49]). Otherwise, there were no clear differences in outcomes based on statin intensity. Conclusions and Relevance: In adults at increased CVD risk but without prior CVD events, statin therapy for primary prevention of CVD was associated with reduced risk of all-cause mortality and CVD events. Benefits of statin therapy appear to be present across diverse demographic and clinical populations, with consistent relative benefits in groups defined by demographic and clinical characteristics.

Serum Thyroglobulin Measurement Following Surgery Without Radioactive Iodine for Differentiated Thyroid Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Background: The utility of serum thyroglobulin (Tg) measurement following partial thyroidectomy or total/near-total thyroidectomy without radioactive iodine (RAI) for differentiated thyroid cancer is unclear. This systematic review examines the diagnostic accuracy of serum Tg measurement for persistent, recurrent, and/or metastatic cancer in these situations. Methods: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central were searched in October 2021 for studies on Tg measurement following partial thyroidectomy or total/near-total thyroidectomy without or before RAI. Quality assessment was performed, and evidence was synthesized qualitatively. Results: Thirty-seven studies met inclusion criteria. Four studies (N = 561) evaluated serum Tg measurement following partial thyroidectomy, five studies (N = 751) evaluated Tg measurement following total/near-total thyroidectomy without RAI, and 28 studies (N = 7618) evaluated Tg measurement following total or near-total thyroidectomy before RAI administration. Following partial thyroidectomy, Tg measurement was not accurate for diagnosing recurrence or metastasis, or estimates were imprecise. Following total/near-total thyroidectomy without RAI, evidence was limited due to few studies with very low rates of recurrence or metastasis, but indicated that Tg levels were usually stable and low. For Tg measurements before RAI administration, diagnostic accuracy for metastatic disease or persistence varied, although sensitivity appeared high (but specificity low) at a cutoff of >1 to 2.5 ng/mL. However, applicability to patients who do not undergo RAI is uncertain because patients selected for RAI are likely to represent a higher risk group. The evidence was very low quality for all scenarios. All studies had methodological limitations, and there was variability in the Tg thresholds evaluated, patient populations, outcomes assessed, and other factors. Conclusions: Very limited evidence suggests low utility of Tg measurement for identifying recurrent or metastatic disease following partial thyroidectomy. Following total/near-total thyroidectomy, Tg levels using a cutoff of 1-2.5 ng/mL might identify patients at low risk for persistent or metastatic disease. Additional research is needed to clarify the role of Tg measurement in these settings, determine optimal Tg thresholds, and determine appropriate measurement intervals.

Active Surveillance Versus Thyroid Surgery for Differentiated Thyroid Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Background: Active surveillance has been proposed as an appropriate management strategy for low-risk differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC), due to the typically favorable prognosis of this condition. This systematic review examines the benefits and harms of active surveillance vs. immediate surgery for DTC, to inform the updated American Thyroid Association guidelines. Methods: A search on Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central was conducted in July 2021 for studies on active surveillance vs. immediate surgery. Studies of surgery vs. no surgery for DTC were assessed separately to evaluate relevance to active surveillance. Quality assessment was performed, and evidence was synthesized narratively. Results: Seven studies (five cohort studies [N = 5432] and two cross-sectional studies [N = 538]) of active surveillance vs. immediate surgery, and seven uncontrolled treatment series of active surveillance (N = 1219) were included. One cross-sectional study was rated fair quality, and the remainder were rated poor quality. In patients with low risk (primarily papillary), small (primarily ≤1 cm) DTC, active surveillance, and immediate surgery were associated with similar, low risk of all-cause or cancer-specific mortality, distant metastasis, and recurrence after surgery. Uncontrolled treatment series reported no cases of mortality in low-risk DTC managed with active surveillance. Among patients managed with active surveillance, rates of tumor growth were low; rates of subsequent surgery varied and primarily occurred due to patient preference rather than tumor progression. Four cohort studies (N = 88,654) found that surgery associated with improved all-cause or thyroid cancer mortality compared with nonsurgical management, but findings were potentially influenced by patient age and tumor risk category and highly susceptible to confounding by indication; eligibility for, and receipt of, active surveillance; and timing of surgery was unclear. Conclusions: In patients with small low-risk (primarily papillary) DTC, active surveillance and immediate surgery may be associated with similar mortality, risk of recurrence, and other outcomes, but methodological limitations preclude strong conclusions. Studies of no surgery vs. surgery are difficult to interpret due to clinical heterogeneity and potential confounding factors and are unsuitable for assessing the utility of active surveillance. Research is needed to clarify the benefits and harms of active surveillance and determine outcomes in nonpapillary DTC, larger (>1 cm) cancers, and older patients.

Psychosocial Interventions for Adults With Schizophrenia: An Overview and Update of Systematic Reviews.

OBJECTIVE: The authors of this systematic review (SR) sought to provide evidence for effects of commonly used psychosocial interventions on several outcomes among adults with schizophrenia. METHODS: MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO databases were searched through July 2020. Eligible studies were SRs and trials of at least 12 weeks duration and with ≥50 participants that compared psychosocial interventions with treatment as usual among adults with schizophrenia. Study design, year, setting, country, sample size, eligibility criteria, population, clinical and intervention characteristics, results, and funding source were extracted, along with quality criteria. The evidence was evaluated on quality and strength of evidence stratified by intervention area and outcome, according to the Evidence-Based Practice Centers Methods Guide of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. RESULTS: Nine SRs and 30 trials (N=23,921 patients) in 11 intervention areas were included. Trials were mostly of fair quality and had low-to-moderate strength of evidence. Compared with treatment as usual, most psychosocial interventions were more effective in improving intervention-targeted outcomes, including core illness symptoms. Compared with treatment as usual, assertive community treatment, cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), family interventions, psychoeducation, social skills training, supported employment, and early interventions for first-episode psychosis (FEP) improved various functional outcomes. CBT and early interventions for FEP improved quality of life. Family interventions, psychoeducation, illness self-management, and early interventions for FEP reduced relapse. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with treatment as usual, most psychosocial interventions improved functional outcomes, quality of life, and core illness symptoms, and several reduced relapse frequency among adults with schizophrenia.

Screening and Interventions to Prevent Dental Caries in Children Younger Than 5 Years: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: A 2014 review for the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) found that oral fluoride supplementation and topical fluoride use were associated with reduced caries incidence in children younger than 5 years. Objective: To update the 2014 review on dental caries screening and preventive interventions to inform the USPSTF. Data Sources: Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (to September 2020); surveillance through July 23, 2021. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on screening, preventive interventions, referral to dental care; cohort studies on screening and referral; studies on diagnostic accuracy of primary care oral examination or risk assessment; and a systematic review on risk of fluorosis included in prior USPSTF reviews. Data Extraction and Synthesis: One investigator abstracted data; a second checked accuracy. Two investigators independently rated study quality. Results: Thirty-two studies (19 trials, 9 observational studies, and 4 nonrandomized clinical intervention studies [total 106 694 participants] and 1 systematic review [19 studies]) were included. No study evaluated effects of primary care screening on clinical outcomes. One study (n = 258) found primary care pediatrician examination associated with a sensitivity of 0.76 (95% CI, 0.55 to 0.91) and specificity of 0.95 (95% CI, 0.92 to 0.98) for identifying a child with cavities, and 1 study found a risk assessment tool associated with sensitivity of 0.53 and specificity of 0.77 (n = 697, CIs not reported) for a child with future caries. No new trials of dietary fluoride supplementation were identified. For prevention, topical fluoride compared with placebo or no topical fluoride was associated with decreased caries burden (13 trials, n = 5733; mean caries increment [difference in decayed, missing, and filled teeth or surfaces], -0.94 [95% CI, -1.74 to -0.34]) and likelihood of incident caries (12 trials, n = 8177; RR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.66 to 0.95]; absolute risk difference, -7%) in higher-risk populations or settings, with no increased fluorosis risk. Evidence on other preventive interventions was limited (education, xylitol) or unavailable (silver diamine fluoride), and no study directly evaluated primary care dentistry referral vs no referral. Conclusions and Relevance: There was no direct evidence on benefits and harms of primary care oral health screening or referral to dentist. Dietary fluoride supplementation and fluoride varnish were associated with improved caries outcomes in higher-risk children and settings.

Screening for Chlamydial and Gonococcal Infections: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.

Importance: The 2014 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation statement supported the effectiveness of screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea in asymptomatic, sexually active women 24 years or younger and in older women at increased risk for infection, although evidence for screening in men was insufficient. Objective: To update the 2014 USPSTF review on screening for chlamydial and gonococcal infection in adults and adolescents, including those who are pregnant. Data Sources: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Ovid MEDLINE (January 1, 2014, through May 28, 2020) with surveillance through May 21, 2021. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials and observational studies of screening effectiveness, accuracy of risk stratification and alternative screening methods, accuracy of tests, and screening harms. Data Extraction and Synthesis: One investigator abstracted data; a second checked accuracy. Two investigators independently assessed study quality. Main Outcomes and Measures: Complications of infection; infection transmission or acquisition; diagnostic accuracy of anatomical site-specific testing and collection methods; screening harms. Results: Twenty-seven studies were included (N = 179 515). Chlamydia screening compared with no screening was significantly associated with reduced risk of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) in 2 of 4 trials and with reduced hospital-diagnosed PID (0.24% vs 0.38%); relative risk, 0.6 [95% CI, 0.4-1.0]), but not clinic-diagnosed PID or epididymitis, in the largest trial. In studies of risk prediction instruments in asymptomatic women, age younger than 22 years demonstrated comparable accuracy to extensive criteria. Sensitivity of chlamydial testing was similar at endocervical (89%-100%) and self- and clinician-collected vaginal (90%-100%) sites for women and at meatal (100%), urethral (99%), and rectal (92%) sites for men but lower at pharyngeal sites (69.2%) for men who have sex with men. Sensitivity of gonococcal testing was 89% or greater for all anatomical samples. False-positive and false-negative testing rates were low across anatomical sites and collection methods. Conclusions and Relevance: Screening for chlamydial infection was significantly associated with a lower risk of PID in young women. Risk prediction criteria demonstrated limited accuracy beyond age. Testing for asymptomatic chlamydial and gonococcal infections was highly accurate at most anatomical sites, including urine and self-collected specimens. Effectiveness of screening in men and during pregnancy, optimal screening intervals, and adverse effects of screening require further evaluation.

Outpatient Cervical Ripening: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the comparative effectiveness and potential harms of cervical ripening in the outpatient compared with the inpatient setting, or different methods of ripening in the outpatient setting alone. DATA SOURCES: Searches for articles in English included MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists (up to August 2020). METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Using predefined criteria and DistillerSR software, 10,853 citations were dual-reviewed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies of outpatient cervical ripening using prostaglandins and mechanical methods in pregnant women at or beyond 37 weeks of gestation. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: Using prespecified criteria, study data abstraction and risk of bias assessment were conducted by two reviewers, random-effects meta-analyses were conducted and strength of evidence was assessed. We included 30 RCTs and 10 cohort studies (N=9,618) most generalizable to women aged 25-30 years with low-risk pregnancies. All findings were low or insufficient strength of evidence and not statistically significant. Incidence of cesarean delivery was not different for any comparison of inpatient and outpatient settings, or comparisons of different methods in the outpatient setting (most evidence available for single-balloon catheters and dinoprostone). Harms were inconsistently reported or inadequately defined. Differences were not found for neonatal infection (eg, sepsis) with outpatient compared with inpatient dinoprostone, birth trauma (eg, cephalohematoma) with outpatient compared with inpatient single-balloon catheter, shoulder dystocia with outpatient dinoprostone compared with placebo, maternal infection (eg, chorioamnionitis) with outpatient compared with inpatient single-balloon catheters or outpatient prostaglandins compared with placebo, and postpartum hemorrhage with outpatient catheter compared with inpatient dinoprostone. Evidence on misoprostol, hygroscopic dilators, and other outcomes (eg, perinatal mortality and time to vaginal birth) was insufficient. CONCLUSION: In women with low-risk pregnancies, outpatient cervical ripening with dinoprostone or single-balloon catheters did not increase cesarean deliveries. Although there were no clear differences in harms when comparing outpatient with inpatient cervical ripening, the certainty of evidence is low or insufficient to draw definitive conclusions. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO, CRD42020167406.