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
• Environment
• Risk of bias
• Reproducibility
• Heterogeneity
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
• High risk of bias (ROBIS)
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Cross-sectional survey/Methodological systematic review
First Author Country United States
Checklists • ROBIS
Aim To assess the epidemiological evidence risk of bias of on systematic overview of reviews (“umbrella review”) of associations between prenatal exposure to ambient air pollutants and congenital heart defect subtypes.
Level of Investigation Descriptive
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 Four reviews (36.3%) made no additional efforts to identify published or unpublished literature in addition to the database searching.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
Number of systematic reviews included 11
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 7302
Treatment impacted Not Applicable
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description