Ondansetron

Ventricular 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
R3944		 Zambelli-Weiner (Unexposed control, NOS), 2019 Ventricular septal defect 1st trimester nested case control unexposed (general population or NOS) Adjustment: Yes 1.29 [1.03;1.61] 81/959   9,058/122,164 9,139 959
ref
S2853
R3966		 Parker, BDS study, 2018 Ventricular septal defect 1st trimester case control unexposed, sick Adjustment: Yes 1.10 [0.90;1.40] 114/489   1,213/6,711 1,327 489
ref
S2756
R3682		 Parker, NBDPS study, 2018 Ventricular septal defect 1st trimester case control unexposed, sick Adjustment: Yes 0.90 [0.60;1.30] 27/280   1,318/7,816 1,345 280
ref
Total 3 studies 1.13 [0.95;1.35] 11,811 1,728
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 1.29[1.03; 1.61]9,13995941%ROB confusion: NAROB selection: NAROB classification: NAROB missing: NAROB mesure: NAROB reporting: NA Parker, BDS study, 2018Parker, BDS study, 2018 1.10[0.90; 1.40]1,32748942%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]1,34528018%ROB confusion: NAROB selection: NAROB classification: NAROB missing: NAROB mesure: NAROB reporting: NA Total (3 studies) I2 = 26% 1.13[0.95; 1.35]11,8111,7280.25.01.0ROB: A: confusion, B: selection, C: classification, D: missing, E: measurement, F: reportinglow,moderate,serious,critical,unclear,

1: Unexposed control, NOS;

Sensitivity analysis

SubsetTE95% CIn casesn exposedkI2 Type of studies cohort studiescohort studies 0 case control studiescase control studies 1.13[0.95; 1.35]11,8111,72826%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) 1.29[1.03; 1.61]9,139959 -NAZambelli-Weiner (Unexposed control, NOS), 2019 1 unexposed, sickunexposed, sick 1.05[0.86; 1.27]2,6727690%NAParker, BDS study, 2018 Parker, NBDPS study, 2018 2 Tags Adjustment   - Yes  - Yes 1.13[0.95; 1.35]11,8111,72826%NAZambelli-Weiner (Unexposed control, NOS), 2019 Parker, BDS study, 2018 Parker, NBDPS study, 2018 3 All studiesAll studies 1.13[0.95; 1.35]11,8111,72826%NAZambelli-Weiner (Unexposed control, NOS), 2019 Parker, BDS study, 2018 Parker, NBDPS study, 2018 30.25.01.0

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 controls (disease free or unspecified)unexposed controls (disease free or unspecified) 1.21[0.99; 1.49]16,43895,31742%NALemon, 2019 Zambelli-Weiner (Unexposed control, NOS), 2019 Huybrechts (Unexposed control), 2018 Fejzo (Unexposed control, disease free), 2016 Pasternak, 2013 5 unexposed, sick controlsunexposed, sick controls 1.05[0.86; 1.27]2,6727690%NAParker, BDS study, 2018 Parker, NBDPS study, 2018 2 exposed to other treatment, sick controlsexposed to other treatment, sick controls 1.07[0.93; 1.23]1,01356,5310%NAHuybrechts (Control exposed to other treatment), 2018 Fejzo (Mainly exposed to other treatements, sick), 2016 20.510.01.0