Fontenot, 2005 |
0/48 (0%) vs 0/50(0%) |
NR |
NR |
NR |
NR |
Ehrenberg, 2006 |
0/101 (0%) vs 0/95 (0%) |
7/101 (6.9%) vs
1/95 (1.1%) |
NR |
NR |
NR |
Darngawn, 2012 |
0/75 (0%) vs 0/75 (0%) |
1/75 (1.3%) vs
0/75 (0%) |
NR |
1/75 (1.3%) vs 0/75 (0%) |
NR |
Maia, 2014 |
0/56 (0%) vs 0/56 (0%) |
3/56 (5.4%) vs 0/56
(0%) |
0/56 (0%) vs 0/56 (0%) |
12/56 (21.4%) vs 12/56 (21.4%) |
0/56 (0%) vs 0/56 (0%) |
Kashanian, 2016 |
1/79 (1.2%) vs 0/91 (0%) |
1/79 (1.2%) vs
NR |
NR |
NR |
NR |
Rimal, 2017 |
2/30 (16.6%) vs 1/30 (8.3%) |
2/30 (16.6%) vs
1/30 (8.3%) |
NR b
|
NR |
0/30 (0%) vs 0/30
(0%) |
Vigil-De Gracia, 2017 |
0/141 (0%) vs 0/143 (0%) |
0/141
(0%) vs 0/143 (0%) |
1/141 (0.7%) vs 1/143 (0.7%) |
29/143 (20.2%)
vs 30/141 (21.0%) |
0/141 (0%) vs 0/143 (0%) |
Vigil-De Gracia, 2018 |
2/558 (0.35%) vs 1/555 (0.2%) |
2/558
(0.35%) vs 1/555 (0.2%) |
4/558 (0.7%) vs 5/555 (0.9%) |
50/558
(9.0%) vs 53/555 (9.5%) |
0/558(0%) vs 0/555(0%) |
Studies total (intervention vs control) |
8 studies, 5/1088
(0.5%) vs 2/1095 (0.2%) |
6 studies, 15/961 (1.6%) vs 3/954 (0.3%) |
3 studies, 5/755 (0.7%) vs 6/754 (0.8%) |
4 studies, 92/832 (11.1%)
vs 95/827 (11.4%) |
4 studies, 0/729 (0%) vs 0/728
(0%) |
I2 |
0% |
0% |
0% |
0% |
- |
RR (95% Confidence interval) |
2.25 (0.5-9.9) |
3.7
(1.2-11.5) |
0.8 (0.3-2.7) |
1.0 (0.7-1.3) |
- |