1. Calcium supplementation for the prevention of pre‐eclampsia: Challenging the evidence from meta‐analyses.
- Author
-
Wright, David, Wright, Alan, Magee, Laura A., Von Dadelszen, Peter, and Nicolaides, Kypros H.
- Subjects
- *
SENSITIVITY analysis , *CALCIUM , *CONFIDENCE intervals , *DIETARY supplements , *DATA analysis - Abstract
Objective: To investigate the validity of the conclusion from Cochrane reviews and meta‐analyses that treatment with calcium supplementation during pregnancy reduces the risk for pre‐eclampsia by 55%, which has been influential in international guidelines and future research. Design: Sensitivity analysis of data from Cochrane reviews of trials evaluating high‐dose calcium supplementation (of at least 1 g/day) for reduction of pre‐eclampsia risk. Setting: Systematic review and meta‐analysis. Population: The Cochrane reviews and meta‐analyses included 13 trials enrolling a total of 15 730 women. Random‐effects meta‐analysis of these studies resulted in a mean risk ratio (RR, calcium/placebo) of 0.45 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31–0.65; p < 0.0001). Methods: We carried out a sensitivity analysis of evidence from the relevant Cochrane review, to examine the impact of study size. Main outcome measures: pre‐eclampsia. Results: In the three largest studies, accounting for 13 815 (88%) of total recruitment, mean RR was 0.92 (95% CI 0.80–1.06) and there was no evidence of heterogeneity between studies (I2 = 0). With inclusion of the smaller studies, mean RR decreased to 0.45 and I2 increased to 70%. Conclusions: In assessment of the effect of calcium supplementation on pre‐eclampsia risk, the naive focus on the mean of the random‐effects meta‐analysis in the presence of substantial heterogeneity is highly misleading. Linked article: This article is commented on by Thornton pp. 1530–1531 in this issue. To view this article visit https://doi.org/10.1111/1471‐0528.17805. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF