Hum Reprod Update. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmw019 Association between thyroid autoantibodies and likelihood of live birth. TAI+ = positive for thyroid autoimmunity; TAI− = negative for thyroid autoimmunity. Considering the I2 value (41%) that indicates moderate heterogeneity, the pooled effect estimate was derived also using a random effect model (OR 0.64; 95% CI [0.42–0.99]; P = 0.05). In the Results section of the abstract “Compared with women with negative TAI, women with positive TAI had a lower LBR (odds ratio (OR) 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.49–0.87]; P = 0.004; 9 studies; 4396 women; I2 = 66%)” Should be corrected to “Compared with women with negative TAI, women with positive TAI had a lower LBR (odds ratio (OR) 0.73; 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.54–0.99]; P = 0.04; 9 studies; 4396 women; I2 = 41%)” In the “Primary Outcome – Live birth rate” section of the Results “Pooling of results from the studies showed a statistically significant reduction in LBR in women with positive TAI compared with women with negative TAI (OR 0.65; 95% CI [0.49–0.87]; P = 0.004). Considering the I2 value (66%) that indicates moderate heterogeneity, the pooled effect estimate was derived also using a random effect model (OR 0.53; 95% CI [0.30–0.93]; P = 0.03) (Fig. 2). A funnel plot showed no indication of asymmetry among studies (Supplementary Fig. S1).” Should be corrected to “Pooling of results from the studies showed a statistically significant reduction in LBR in women with positive TAI compared with women with negative TAI (OR 0.73; 95% CI [0.54–0.99], P=0.04). Considering the I2 value (41%) that indicates moderate heterogeneity, the pooled effect estimate was derived also using a random effect model (OR 0.64; 95% CI [0.42–0.99]; P = 0.05) (Fig. 2). A funnel plot showed no indication of asymmetry among studies (Supplementary Fig. S1).” The authors would like to apologise for these errors, but reassure readers that they do not affect the other content or conclusions of the article.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Busnelli et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: