Table 3.

Risk of AMI in rosiglitazone users compared with pioglitazone users, overall and subgroup analyses

Study (author, year)	Overall RR (95 % CI)	Subgroup analyses
		Overall sensitivity analysisa	Incident and prevalent cases		New users
				Sensitivity analysisa		Sensitivity analysisa
Walker, 2008 [39]	0.82 (0.49–1.37)
Ziyadeh, 2009 [42]	1.35 (1.12–1.62)
Brownstein, 2010 [27]	1.70 (1.31–2.21)	Not included		Not included	Not reported	Not reported
Bilik, 2010 [26]	0.75 (0.33–1.67)				Not reported	Not reported
Wertz, 2010 [40]	0.92 (0.70–1.20)
Dormuth, 2009 [28]	1.00 (0.67–1.49)
Juurlink, 2009 [33]	1.05 (0.90–1.23)
Graham, 2010 [30]	1.06 (0.96–1.18)
Winkelmayer, 2008 [41]	1.08 (0.93–1.25)		Not reported
Koro, 2008 [34]	1.12 (0.99–1.26)		Not reported		Not reported	Not reported
Gerrits, 2007 [29]	1.27 (1.06–1.52)	Not included		Not included		Not included
Fixed-effects, sRR (95 % CI)	1.12 (1.06–1.18)	1.09 (1.03–1.15)	1.13 (1.06–1.21)	1.08 (1.00–1.16)	1.10 (1.03–1.17)	1.08 (1.01–1.15)
Random-effects, sRR (95 % CI)	1.13 (1.04–1.24)	1.09 (1.02–1.16)	1.14 (1.00–1.30)	1.07 (0.96–1.19)	1.10 (1.01–1.20)	1.08 (0.99–1.18)
Heterogeneity statistics	τ2 = 0.01 χ2 = 22.05, df = 10 (P = 0.01) I 2 = 55 %	τ2 = 0.00 χ2 = 9.56, df = 8 (P = 0.30) I 2 = 16 %	τ2 = 0.02 χ2 = 21.74, df = 8 (P = 0.005) I 2 = 63 %	τ2 = 0.01 χ2 = 9.26, df = 6 (P = 0.16) I 2 = 35 %	τ2 = 0.01 χ2 = 11.06, df = 7 (P = 0.14) I 2 = 37 %	τ2 = 0.00 χ2 = 8.47, df = 6 (P = 0.21) I 2 = 29 %

Not reported indicates that the study did not provide an estimate for that subgroup analysis. Not included indicates that the study was removed as part of the sensitivity analysis

df degrees of freedom, RR relative risk, sRR summary relative risk

^aSensitivity analysis: we excluded those studies with a combined high or unclear risk of bias for more than 30 % of the items in the RTI item bank