Tenofovir (all routes except local)

Metabolic disorders in neonate/infant

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.
S5740
R14248		 Williams, 2016 Infant Metabolic Abnormality during pregnancy (anytime or not specified) cohort exposed to other treatment, sick Adjustment: Yes Control group: non-TDF (mix or unspecified regimens) Exposed group: TDF (mix or unspecified regimens) Indication: HIV 0.71 [0.48;1.06] -/-   -/- - -
ref
S5273
R13641		 Celen, 2013 Neonatal Phenylketonuria 2nd and/or 3rd trimester retrospective cohort unexposed, sick Adjustment: No Control group: Unexposed, sick Exposed group: TDF (only) Indication: CHB 1.10 [0.02;57.89] C 0/21   0/23 0 21
ref
Total 2 studies 0.71 [0.48;1.06] 0 21
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 Williams, 2016Williams, 2016 0.71[0.48; 1.06]--99%ROB confusion: NAROB selection: NAROB classification: NAROB missing: NAROB mesure: NAROB reporting: NA Celen, 2013Celen, 2013 1.10[0.02; 57.89]0211%ROB confusion: NAROB selection: NAROB classification: NAROB missing: NAROB mesure: NAROB reporting: NA Total (2 studies) I2 = 0% 0.71[0.48; 1.06]-210.25.01.0ROB: 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 0.71[0.48; 1.06]-210%NAWilliams, 2016 Celen, 2013 2 case control studiescase control studies 0 Type of controls unexposed, sickunexposed, sick 1.10[0.02; 57.89]-21 -NACelen, 2013 1 exposed to other treatment, sickexposed to other treatment, sick 0.71[0.48; 1.06]-- -NAWilliams, 2016 1 Tags Adjustment   - No  - No 1.10[0.02; 57.89]-21 -NACelen, 2013 1   - Yes  - Yes 0.71[0.48; 1.06]-- -NAWilliams, 2016 1 Control group   - non-TDF (mix or unspecified regimens)  - non-TDF (mix or unspecified regimens) 0.71[0.48; 1.06]-- -NAWilliams, 2016 1   - Unexposed, sick  - Unexposed, sick 1.10[0.02; 57.89]-21 -NACelen, 2013 1 Exposed group   - TDF (mix or unspecified regimens)  - TDF (mix or unspecified regimens) 0.71[0.48; 1.06]-- -NAWilliams, 2016 1   - TDF (only)  - TDF (only) 1.10[0.02; 57.89]-21 -NACelen, 2013 1 Indication   - CHB  - CHB 1.10[0.02; 57.89]-21 -NACelen, 2013 1   - HIV  - HIV 0.71[0.48; 1.06]-- -NAWilliams, 2016 1 All studiesAll studies 0.71[0.48; 1.06]-210%NAWilliams, 2016 Celen, 2013 20.25.01.0

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

excluded

Sub-groupsTE95% CIn casesn exposedkI2ROB type of controls unexposed, sick controlsunexposed, sick controls 1.10[0.02; 57.89]-21 -NACelen, 2013 1 exposed to other treatment, sick controlsexposed to other treatment, sick controls 0.71[0.48; 1.06]-- -NAWilliams, 2016 10.510.01.0