Skip to main content
. 2022 Mar 29;7(2):I–XIX. doi: 10.1177/23969873221078696

Table 2.

Grade evidence table for PICO 1.2.

Certainty assessment № of patients Effect Certainty Importance
№ of studies Study design Risk of bias Inconsistency Indirectness Imprecision Other considerations Hormone replacement therapy Control Relative (95% CI) Absolute (95% CI)
Haemorrhagic stroke
 5 Randomised trials Not serious Not serious Not serious Seriousa Publication bias strongly suspectedb 45/21197 (0.2%) 42/14222 (0.3%) OR (0.49 to 1.15) 1 fewer per (from 2 fewer to 0 fewer) ⊕⊕○○
LOW
CRITICAL
Haemorrhagic stroke – HRT
 2 Randomised trials Not serious Not serious Not serious Seriousa Publication bias strongly suspectedb 26/9886 (0.3%) 25/9485 (0.3%) OR 1.00 (0.57 to 1.74) 0 fewer per 1,000 (from 1 fewer to 2 more) ⊕⊕○○
LOW
CRITICAL
Haemorrhagic stroke – Receptor modulator
 3 Randomised trials Not serious Not serious Not serious Not serious Publication bias strongly suspectedb 19/11311 (0.2%) 17/4737 (0.4%) OR 0.50 (0.26 to 0.97) 2 fewer per 1,000 (from 3 fewer to 0 fewer) ⊕⊕⊕○
MODERATE
CRITICAL

CI: Confidence interval; OR: Odds ratio; HRT. Hormone Replacement therapy.

aWide confidence intervals.

bFive or less studies reported this outcome.