Hydroxychloroquine (Indication Antiphospholipid Syndrom)

Small for gestational age (weight)

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.
S13685
R53193		 Gerde, 2021 Intrauterine Growth Restriction throughout pregnancy retrospective cohort unexposed, sick Adjustment: No Co-administration Indication HCQ: Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) 3.37 [0.17;67.18] C 3/69   0/32 3 69
ref
S13674
R53134		 Ye, 2017 Small for gestational age throughout pregnancy retrospective cohort unexposed, sick Adjustment: No Co-administration Indication HCQ: Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) 0.35 [0.15;0.82] C 8/112   20/110 28 112
ref
S13718
R53445		 Sciascia, 2016 Intra uterine growth restriction (IUGR) throughout pregnancy retrospective cohort unexposed, sick Adjustment: No Indication HCQ: Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) 0.41 [0.02;8.75] C 0/35   2/73 2 35
ref
Total 3 studies 0.42 [0.18;0.99] 33 216
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 Gerde, 2021Gerde, 2021 3.37[0.17; 67.18]3698%ROB confusion: seriousROB selection: unclearROB classification: criticalROB missing: lowROB mesure: moderateROB reporting: moderate Ye, 2017Ye, 2017 0.35[0.15; 0.82]2811284%ROB confusion: seriousROB selection: unclearROB classification: criticalROB missing: unclearROB mesure: moderateROB reporting: moderate Sciascia, 2016Sciascia, 2016 0.41[0.02; 8.75]2358%ROB confusion: criticalROB selection: lowROB classification: criticalROB missing: unclearROB mesure: moderateROB reporting: moderate Total (3 studies) I2 = 2% 0.42[0.18; 0.99]332160.210.01.0ROB: 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 0.42[0.18; 0.99]332162%NAGerde, 2021 Ye, 2017 Sciascia, 2016 3 case control studiescase control studies 0 Type of controls unexposed, sickunexposed, sick 0.42[0.18; 0.99]332162%NAGerde, 2021 Ye, 2017 Sciascia, 2016 3 Tags Adjustment   - No  - No 0.42[0.18; 0.99]332162%NAGerde, 2021 Ye, 2017 Sciascia, 2016 3 Co-administrationCo-administration 0.67[0.09; 5.14]3118151%NAGerde, 2021 Ye, 2017 2 Indication HCQ   - Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS)  - Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) 0.42[0.18; 0.99]332162%NAGerde, 2021 Ye, 2017 Sciascia, 2016 3 All studiesAll studies 0.42[0.18; 0.99]332162%NAGerde, 2021 Ye, 2017 Sciascia, 2016 30.110.01.0

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 Out of scale0.42[0.18; 0.99]332162%NAGerde, 2021 Ye, 2017 Sciascia, 2016 30.510.01.0

Umbrella review (other published meta-analyses)

Published MAControlPeriodTE95% CIn exposedkI2 Tian (Antiphospholipid antibody syndrome) (Fe ...Tian (Antiphospholipid antibody syndrome) (Fetal growth restriction) Out of scale0.22[0.13; 1.88]0%-Wwhatever (meta-analysis)Anyduring pregnancy (anytime or not specified)studies TTT2 metaPregmetaPreg Out of scale0.42[0.18; 0.99]2%216----Gerde, 2021 Ye, 2017 Sciascia, 2016 30.510.01.0