Ondansetron

Atrial septal defect

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.
S2757
R3945		 Zambelli-Weiner (Unexposed control, NOS), 2019 Atrial septal defect 1st trimester nested case control unexposed (general population or NOS) Adjustment: Yes 1.49 [1.32;1.69] 15/893   813/113,919 828 893
ref
S2852
R3866		 Huybrechts (Control exposed to other treatment), 2018 Secundum atrial septal defect 1st trimester retrospective cohort (claims database) exposed to other treatment, sick excluded Adjustment: Yes 1.08 [0.90;1.30]
excluded (control group) 		147/55,579   373/185,699 520 55,579
ref
S2844
R3836		 Huybrechts (Unexposed control), 2018 Secundum atrial septal defect 1st trimester retrospective cohort (claims database) unexposed (general population or NOS) Adjustment: Yes 1.00 [0.88;1.15] 216/88,446   3,080/1,727,546 3,296 88,446
ref
S2853
R3967		 Parker, BDS study, 2018 Atrial septal defect 1st trimester case control unexposed, sick Adjustment: Yes 0.80 [0.50;1.20] 24/399   340/5,838 364 399
ref
S2756
R3683		 Parker, NBDPS study, 2018 Atrial septal defect 1st trimester case control unexposed, sick Adjustment: Yes 0.90 [0.60;1.30] 41/294   1,164/7,662 1,205 294
ref
S2746
R3890		 Pasternak, 2013 Atrial septal defect 1st trimester population based cohort retrospective unexposed (general population or NOS) Adjustment: No 0.89 [0.30;2.63] C 4/1,233   18/4,932 22 1,233
ref
Total 5 studies 1.05 [0.79;1.39] 5,715 91,265
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 Zambelli-Weiner (Unexposed control, NOS), 2019Zambelli-Weiner, 2019 1 1.49[1.32; 1.69]82889329%ROB confusion: NAROB selection: NAROB classification: NAROB missing: NAROB mesure: NAROB reporting: NA Huybrechts (Unexposed control), 2018Huybrechts, 2018 2 1.00[0.88; 1.15]3,29688,44629%ROB confusion: NAROB selection: NAROB classification: NAROB missing: NAROB mesure: NAROB reporting: NA Parker, BDS study, 2018Parker, BDS study, 2018 0.80[0.50; 1.20]36439918%ROB confusion: NAROB selection: NAROB classification: NAROB missing: NAROB mesure: NAROB reporting: NA Parker, NBDPS study, 2018Parker, NBDPS study, 2018 0.90[0.60; 1.30]1,20529419%ROB confusion: NAROB selection: NAROB classification: NAROB missing: NAROB mesure: NAROB reporting: NA Pasternak, 2013Pasternak, 2013 0.89[0.30; 2.63]221,2336%ROB confusion: NAROB selection: NAROB classification: NAROB missing: NAROB mesure: NAROB reporting: NA Total (5 studies) I2 = 84% 1.05[0.79; 1.39]5,71591,2650.25.01.0ROB: A: confusion, B: selection, C: classification, D: missing, E: measurement, F: reportinglow,moderate,serious,critical,unclear,

1: Unexposed control, NOS; 2: Unexposed control;

Sensitivity analysis

SubsetTE95% CIn casesn exposedkI2 Type of studies cohort studiescohort studies 1.00[0.87; 1.14]3,31889,6790%NAHuybrechts (Unexposed control), 2018 Pasternak, 2013 2 case control studiescase control studies 1.06[0.68; 1.65]2,3971,58683%NAZambelli-Weiner (Unexposed control, NOS), 2019 Parker, BDS study, 2018 Parker, NBDPS study, 2018 3 Type of controls unexposed (disease free or unspecified)unexposed (disease free or unspecified) 1.19[0.83; 1.71]4,14690,57289%NAZambelli-Weiner (Unexposed control, NOS), 2019 Huybrechts (Unexposed control), 2018 Pasternak, 2013 3 unexposed, sickunexposed, sick 0.85[0.64; 1.14]1,5696930%NAParker, BDS study, 2018 Parker, NBDPS study, 2018 2 Tags Adjustment   - No  - No 0.89[0.30; 2.63]221,233 -NAPasternak, 2013 1   - Yes  - Yes 1.06[0.79; 1.43]5,69390,03288%NAZambelli-Weiner (Unexposed control, NOS), 2019 Huybrechts (Unexposed control), 2018 Parker, BDS study, 2018 Parker, NBDPS study, 2018 4 All studiesAll studies 1.05[0.79; 1.39]5,71591,26584%NAZambelli-Weiner (Unexposed control, NOS), 2019 Huybrechts (Unexposed control), 2018 Parker, BDS study, 2018 Parker, NBDPS study, 2018 Pasternak, 2013 50.25.01.0

Publication bias and p-hacking diagnosis

funnel plot
0.0-1.31.40.6640.000Zambelli-Weiner (Unexposed control, NOS), 2019Huybrechts (Unexposed control), 2018Parker, BDS study, 2018Parker, NBDPS study, 2018Pasternak, 2013

Asymetry test p-value = 0.4225 (by Egger's regression)

slope=0.3306 (0.1969); intercept=-1.8520 (1.9989); t=0.9265; p=0.4225

p values plot
0.01.00.01.0

Sub-groups analysis using all included studies

excluded 2852

Sub-groupsTE95% CIn casesn exposedkI2ROB type of controls unexposed controls (disease free or unspecified)unexposed controls (disease free or unspecified) 1.19[0.83; 1.71]4,14690,57289%NAZambelli-Weiner (Unexposed control, NOS), 2019 Huybrechts (Unexposed control), 2018 Pasternak, 2013 3 unexposed, sick controlsunexposed, sick controls 0.85[0.64; 1.14]1,5696930%NAParker, BDS study, 2018 Parker, NBDPS study, 2018 2 exposed to other treatment, sick controlsexposed to other treatment, sick controls 1.08[0.90; 1.30]52055,579 -NAHuybrechts (Control exposed to other treatment), 2018 10.510.01.0