Prenatal exposure to ambient air pollutants and congenital heart defects: An umbrella review

Ref ID 1045
First Author S. Michel
Journal ENVIRONMENT INTERNATIONAL
Year Of Publishing 2023
URL https://www-sciencedirect-com.sheffield.idm.oclc.org/science/article/pii/S0160412023003495?via%3Dihub
Keywords Cardiology
Risk of bias
Environment
Problem(s) Poor consideration of publication bias
Lack of statistical expertise in handling of quantitative data
Methods not described to enable replication
Grey literature excluded
Limited quality assessment or no risk of bias
No registered or published protocol
Number of systematic reviews included 11
Summary of Findings Of the 11 included systematic reviews, three were judged as high risk of bias and the remaining seven as an unclear risk of bias using ROBIS. Four reviews (36.3%) made no additional efforts to identify published or unpublished literature in addition to the database searching. For the appraisal of the quality or risk of bias in primary studies, four reviews (36.3%) did not conduct a formal assessment. For the ROBIS domain 4, “appropriateness of data synthesis”, only one review (9.0%) documented planned analyses in an a priori protocol. In five reviews (45.4%), the method of choosing the meta-analytical model was not appropriate. For one review, none of the four selected meta-analytical results could be reproduced, including the narrow CIs. Further, subgroup or sensitivity analyses, or statistical assessments of publication bias using funnel plots were not conducted for some meta-analyses
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? Not Applicable
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study?