Thiouracil, propylthiouracil, benzylthiouracil

Goiter

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.
S3422
R10981
Hawken (control exposed to MMI), 2016 Fetal goitre 2nd trimester retrospective cohort exposed to other treatment, sick Adjustment: No 1.00 [0.15;6.53] C 4/22   2/11 6 22
ref
S3564
R7111
Gianetti (control exposed to MMI), 2015 Neonatal goiter at least 1st trimester retrospective cohort exposed to other treatment, sick excluded Adjustment: No 7.34 [0.29;183.14] C
excluded (control group)
1/52   0/124 1 52
ref
S3565
R7122
Gianetti (control unexposed, sick), 2015 Neonatal goiter throughout pregnancy retrospective cohort unexposed, sick Adjustment: No 12.03 [0.48;299.72] C 1/52   0/203 1 52
ref
S3456
R6569
Dwarakanath (control exposed to MMI), 1999 Goitre throughout pregnancy retrospective cohort exposed to other treatment, sick Adjustment: No 1.00 [0.02;58.44] C 0/7   0/7 0 7
ref
S3469
R6636
Momotani (control exposed to MMI), 1997 Goiter throughout pregnancy prospective cohort exposed to other treatment, sick Adjustment: No 1.27 [0.02;65.63] C 0/34   0/43 0 34
ref
S3439
R6388
Davis, 1989 Neonatal Goiter during pregnancy (anytime or not specified) prospective cohort unexposed, sick Adjustment: No 0.45 [0.02;11.98] C 1/52   0/8 1 52
ref
Total 5 studies 1.35 [0.37;4.94] 8 167
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 Hawken (control exposed to MMI), 2016Hawken, 2016 1 1.00[0.15; 6.53]62248%ROB confusion: criticalROB selection: criticalROB classification: unclearROB missing: lowROB mesure: criticalROB reporting: unclear Gianetti (control unexposed, sick), 2015Gianetti, 2015 2 12.03[0.48; 299.72]15216%ROB confusion: criticalROB selection: moderateROB classification: moderateROB missing: lowROB mesure: criticalROB reporting: critical Dwarakanath (control exposed to MMI), 1999Dwarakanath, 1999 3 1.00[0.02; 58.44]0710%ROB confusion: criticalROB selection: moderateROB classification: moderateROB missing: lowROB mesure: unclearROB reporting: unclear Momotani (control exposed to MMI), 1997Momotani, 1997 4 1.27[0.02; 65.63]03411%ROB confusion: criticalROB selection: unclearROB classification: unclearROB missing: unclearROB mesure: moderateROB reporting: moderate Davis, 1989Davis, 1989 0.45[0.02; 11.98]15215%ROB confusion: criticalROB selection: moderateROB classification: moderateROB missing: lowROB mesure: criticalROB reporting: unclear Total (5 studies) I2 = 0% 1.35[0.37; 4.94]81670.250.01.0ROB: A: confusion, B: selection, C: classification, D: missing, E: measurement, F: reportinglow,moderate,serious,critical,unclear,

1: control exposed to MMI; 2: control unexposed, sick; 3: control exposed to MMI; 4: control exposed to MMI;

Sensitivity analysis

SubsetTE95% CIn casesn exposedkI2 Type of studies cohort studiescohort studies 1.35[0.37; 4.94]81670%NAHawken (control exposed to MMI), 2016 Gianetti (control unexposed, sick), 2015 Dwarakanath (control exposed to MMI), 1999 Momotani (control exposed to MMI), 1997 Davis, 1989 5 case control studiescase control studies 0 Type of controls unexposed, sickunexposed, sick 2.36[0.09; 59.66]210449%NAGianetti (control unexposed, sick), 2015 Davis, 1989 2 exposed to other treatment, sickexposed to other treatment, sick 1.04[0.22; 4.96]6630%NAHawken (control exposed to MMI), 2016 Dwarakanath (control exposed to MMI), 1999 Momotani (control exposed to MMI), 1997 3 Tags Adjustment   - No  - No 1.35[0.37; 4.94]81670%NAHawken (control exposed to MMI), 2016 Gianetti (control unexposed, sick), 2015 Dwarakanath (control exposed to MMI), 1999 Momotani (control exposed to MMI), 1997 Davis, 1989 5 All studiesAll studies 1.35[0.37; 4.94]81670%NAHawken (control exposed to MMI), 2016 Gianetti (control unexposed, sick), 2015 Dwarakanath (control exposed to MMI), 1999 Momotani (control exposed to MMI), 1997 Davis, 1989 50.250.01.0

Publication bias and p-hacking diagnosis

funnel plot
0.0-4.95.22.4910.000Hawken (control exposed to MMI), 2016Gianetti (control unexposed, sick), 2015Dwarakanath (control exposed to MMI), 1999Momotani (control exposed to MMI), 1997Davis, 1989

Asymetry test p-value = 0.7874 (by Egger's regression)

slope=-0.2272 (1.8887); intercept=0.3773 (1.2799); t=0.2948; p=0.7874

p values plot
0.01.00.01.0

Sub-groups analysis using all included studies

excluded 3564

Sub-groupsTE95% CIn casesn exposedkI2ROB type of controls unexposed, sick controlsunexposed, sick controls 2.36[0.09; 59.66]210449%NAGianetti (control unexposed, sick), 2015 Davis, 1989 2 exposed to other treatment, sick controlsexposed to other treatment, sick controls 1.04[0.22; 4.96]6630%NAHawken (control exposed to MMI), 2016 Dwarakanath (control exposed to MMI), 1999 Momotani (control exposed to MMI), 1997 30.510.01.0