Summary Outcome Measures for Silo Repair in Neonates with Simple Gastroschisis.

* The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
CI: Confidence interval; OR: Odds ratio;
GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.
1 Allocation to SR in Tsai 2010 and Rodriguez 2009 was based upon failure of OPFC, suggesting that an element of selection bias may enter into the analysis.
2 Three small studies with lower quality methodology favour OPFC whilst the one large study with more robust methodology favours SR.
3 Cumulative sample size is less than the optimal information size (OIS) and the 95% confidence interval for the pooled effect crosses the line of harm, the line of no effect and the line of benefit.
4 Cumulative sample size is less than the OIS and the 95% confidence intervals for the pooled data crosses both the line of benefit and line of no effect
Summary Outcome Measures for Silo Repair in Neonates with Simple Gastroschisis.