Table 3.
The output of the univariable and multivariable linear meta-regression analyses performed for the association of the sphenoidal emissary foramen (SEF) presence with the studied variables
| Univariable models | Multivariable model | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate | p value | 95% CI | Estimate | p value | 95% CI | |
| Continent of origin | ||||||
| America (ref.) | ||||||
| Asia | 0.03 | 0.597 | (− 0.09; 0.15) | |||
| Europe | 0.01 | 0.956 | (− 0.15; 0.16) | |||
| Type of data | ||||||
| Dried skulls (ref.) | ||||||
| Imaging | 0.12 | 0.106 | (− 0.03; 0.27) | 0.13 | 0.060 | (− 0.01; − 0.26) |
| Probing | ||||||
| No (ref.) | ||||||
| Yes | 0.02 | 0.768 | (− 0.09; 0.12) | |||
| Instrument used | ||||||
| Bristle | − 0.02 | 0.778 | (− 0.21; 0.16) | |||
| Wire | 0.03 | 0.705 | (− 0.11; 0.16) | |||
| Other | 0.02 | 0.705 | (− 0.13; 0.18) | |||
| Dominance | ||||||
| Bilateral (ref.) | ||||||
| Unilateral | − 0.13 | 0.010** | (− 0.22; − 0.03) | − 0.13 | 0.005** | (− 0.22; − 0.04) |
| Study sample size | ||||||
| Large (ref.) | ||||||
| Small | − 0.01 | 0.880 | (− 0.12; 0.10) | |||
| Study Quality | ||||||
| High (ref.) | ||||||
| Moderate | − 0.04 | 0.482 | (0.32; 0.49) | |||
| Measurements | ||||||
| No (ref.) | ||||||
| Yes | − 0.08 | 0.140 | (− 0.18; 0.02) | |||
| SEF diameter | 0.02 | 0.787 | (− 0.13; − 0.17) | |||
| SEF–FO distance | − 0.06 | 0.527 | (− 0.27; − 0.15) | |||
| SEF–FS distance | − 0.35 | 0.194 | (− 1.12; − 0.43) | |||
In bold text, the statistically significant findings are being highlighted
Ref reference category, 95% C.I. 95% confidence intervals, SEF diameter sphenoidal emissary foramen’s anteroposterior diameter (measured in mm), SEF–FO distance distance between sphenoidal emissary foramen and foramen ovale (measured in mm), SEF–FS distance distance between sphenoidal emissary foramen and foramen spinosum, ** strong statistical association