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

<p>* The basis for the <b>assumed risk</b> (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The <b>corresponding risk</b> (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the <b>relative effect</b> of the intervention (and its 95% CI).</p><p><b>CI:</b> Confidence interval; <b>OR:</b> Odds ratio;</p><p>GRADE Working Group grades of evidence <b>High quality:</b> Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. <b>Moderate quality:</b> Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. <b>Low quality:</b> 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. <b>Very low quality:</b> We are very uncertain about the estimate.</p><p>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.</p><p>² Three small studies with lower quality methodology favour OPFC whilst the one large study with more robust methodology favours SR.</p><p>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.</p><p>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</p><p>Summary Outcome Measures for Silo Repair in Neonates with Simple Gastroschisis.