Patent ductus arterious

R analysis
id Study   Lib. in paper Exposition period    Study type  Control type 
Tags OR 95%CI x1/n1 x0/n0 no cases no exposed ROB Ref.
Huybrechts, 2018 Patent ductus arteriosus 1st trimester retrospective cohort (claims database) exposed to other treatment, sick Adjustment: Yes 1.64 [1.20;2.22] 56/52,809   80/77,165 136 52,809
Total 1 studies 1.64 [1.21;2.23] 136 52,809
x1: number of endpoints among exposed, n1: number of exposed; x0: number of endpoints among non exposed, n0: number of non exposed; C: calculated odds ratio from numbers of events and effectives

Forest plot

StudyTE95% CIn casesn exposedweightROBABCDEF Huybrechts, 2018Huybrechts, 2018 1.64[1.20; 2.22]13652,8090%ROB confusion: NAROB selection: NAROB classification: NAROB missing: NAROB mesure: NAROB reporting: NA0.55.01.0ROB: A: confusion, B: selection, C: classification, D: missing, E: measurement, F: reportinglow,moderate,serious,critical,unclear,

Sensitivity analysis

SubsetTE95% CIn casesn exposedkI2 Type of studies cohort studiescohort studies 1.64[1.21; 2.23]13652,809 -NAHuybrechts, 2018 1 case control studiescase control studies 0 Type of controls exposed to other treatment, sickexposed to other treatment, sick 1.64[1.21; 2.23]13652,809 -NAHuybrechts, 2018 1 Tags Adjustment   - Yes  - Yes 1.64[1.21; 2.23]13652,809 -NAHuybrechts, 2018 1 All studiesAll studies 1.64[1.21; 2.23]13652,809 -NAHuybrechts, 2018

Publication bias and p-hacking diagnosis

funnel plot

Funnel plot not drawn. Less than 3 points.

Asymetry test p-value = NaN (by Egger's regression)

not enought points

p values plot

Funnel plot not drawn. Less than 3 points.

Sub-groups analysis using all included studies


Sub-groupsTE95% CIn casesn exposedkI2ROB type of controls exposed to other treatment, sick controlsexposed to other treatment, sick controls 1.64[1.21; 2.23]13652,809 -NAHuybrechts, 2018 10.510.01.0