Skip to main content
. 2021 May 26;12:670170. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2021.670170

TABLE 3.

Evaluation of bias and heterogeneity of 34 primary comparisons evaluating systematic corticosteroid use on COVID-19.

Publication Outcomes No. of studies I2 (95% CI)* p heterogeneity* Egger’s p value SD largest SD fixed SD random Observed E largest E fixed E random p value §
Budhathoki et al. (2020) (Nepal) Mortality 14 88.8% (89.1–94.8%) p < 0.001 0.815 43.38 11.4 42.72 9 13.99 14 6.426
Discharge rate 9 62.0% (21.0–81.0%) p = 0.007 0.771 1.136 1.332 3.424 4 8.751 8.991 6.5
Hospitalization 4 80.0% (48.0–93.0%) p = 0.002 0.772 329.58 5.802 22.935 1 0.304 1.357 0.29
Clinical improvement 9 76.0% (55.0–88.0%) p < 0.001 0.317 11.443 1.032 1.032 8 3.681 9 9
MV 6 88.0% (77.0–93.0%) p < 0.001 0.3 200.381 5.137 18.347 3 4.572 4.128 0.756
Hospital stay 4 70.1% (14.0–89.6%) p = 0.018 0.661 21.043 20.911 43.154 4 4 4 3.996
Negative conversion 4 14.4% (0–86.9%) p = 0.320 0.4781 19.317 17.046 20.578 2 3.876 3.976 3.872
Cano et al. (2020) (America) Mortality 27 89.0% (86.0–92.0%) p < 0.001 0.03897 4.294 5.024 28.17 12 22.0914 21.978 20.614
Cheng et al. (2020) (China) Clinical improvement 1
Mortality 6 96.0% (93.0%-0.97) p < 0.001 0.5223 43.38 10.015 36.474 4 5.994 5.994 0.63
VCT 5 91.4% (82.9–95.7%) p < 0.001 0.9977 17.533 5.653 22.372 2 0.395 4.995 1.84
MV 1
Hospital stay 3 98.7% (97.7–99.2%) p < 0.001 0.369 1.673 6.386 25.631 3 3 3 1.617
ICU stay 1
Lu et al. (2020) (China) Mortality 4 91.0% (80.0–96.0%) p < 0.001 0.6228 50.001 7.756 35.043 2 2.557 3.88 0.748
Duration of fever 1
Lung inflammation absorption 1
Hospital stay 2 0 p = 0.603 10.201 9.796 9.796 2 1.8 1.998 1.998 0.112
Pasin et al. (2020) (multiple nations) Mortality 5 0 (0–69.6%) p = 0.603 0.3308 3.476 4.475 4.475 1 3.99 3.389 3.389
MV 3 0 (0–86.3%) p = 0.469 0.6173 6.384 4.41 3.643 0 2.802 2.826 0.995
Pei et al. (2020) (China) Mortality 5 61.9% (0–85.7%) p = 0.033 0.1141 15.413 13.004 20.838 4 2.518 4.914 3.301
Sarkar et al. (2020) (India) Mortality 12 96.3% (94.8–97.4%) p < 0.001 0.3671 4.294 5.763 52.191 9 9.818 12 6.226
Hospital stay 6 92.5% (86.5–95.9%) p < 0.001 0.515 21.043 15.334 32.134 4 6 5.994 3.761
VCT 2 0 p = 0.517 19.729 12.194 12.194 0 0.726 0.8 0.8
Siemieniuk et al. (2020) (multiple nations) Mortality 1
MV 1
Hospital stay 1
Sterne et al. (2020) (multiple nations) Mortality 7 30.9% (0–70.5%) p = 0.192 0.3292 2.59 2.211 3.263 1 6.972 6.937 5.363
AEs 6 17.4% (39.3–88.4%) p = 0.691 0.4461 3.837 2.557 5.586 0 4.416 3.401 1.584
Tlayjeh et al. (2020) (Arabia) Mortality 10 82.2% (70.7–89.2%) p < 0.001 0.884 3.734 4.159 13.37 7 9.803 9.493 1.898
MV 3 74.5% (15.1–92.3%) p = 0.020 0.498 5.231 11.431 2 1.588 2.362
van Paassen et al. (2020) (Netherlands) Mortality 22 60.6% (39.0–74.5%) p < 0.001 0.29 4.558 11.546 7 20.966 4.422
MV 7 10.9% (0–74.0%) p = 0.346 0.591 2.658 2.892 1 6.709 6.495
Ye et al. (2020) (multiple nations) Mortality 2 0 p = 0.768 19.911 19.911 2 0.6266 0.6266 0.099

Abbreviations: AEs, adverse events; 95% CI, 95% confidence interval; ICU, intensive care unit; MV, mechanical ventilation; NA, not available; SD, standard difference; VCT, virus clearance time.

*

I2 of the heterogeneity test, p value for the Q test.

From Egger’s regression asymmetry test.

Observed and expected number of significant studies using effects from the largest study (most with the smallest SE), fixed-effects results, random-effects results of each included meta-analysis as plausible effect size.

§

Two-sided p value of the excess significance test on intended outcomes. Hospital stay in the study of Lu et al. and mortality in the study of Ye et al. had O > E results, and the p value was calculated.