Article first published online: 18 MAR 2014
© 2014 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
Volume 121, Issue 5, page 652, April 2014
How to Cite
(2014), Corrigendum. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 121: 652. doi: 10.1111/1471-0528.12697
- Issue published online: 18 MAR 2014
- Article first published online: 18 MAR 2014
Vol. 120, Issue 7, 812–822, Article first published online: 26 MAR 2013
In the following article the authors have identified that a publication was missing from one of their meta-analyses. They identified four publications which reported ‘major congenital malformations’, where five should have been identified. The missing publication was that of Blais et al., a retrospective study which reported an increased risk of both any congenital malformations (odds ratio [OR] 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.20–1.40) and major congenital malformations (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.22–1.47) among women with asthma compared to women without asthma. The data for the outcome ‘any congenital malformations’ was included in the meta-analysis. However, the data on ‘major malformations’ was inadvertently not included in the analysis.
The authors have repeated the meta-analysis with the data from Blais et al. included, and the overall result was unchanged. Initially they reported that maternal asthma was not associated with an increased risk of major congenital malformations (RR 1.31, 95% CI [0.57, 3.02]). With the additional study included, maternal asthma was still not associated with an increased risk of major congenital malformations (RR 1.18, 95% CI [0.75, 1.84]). Since Blais’ study was very large, the number of major malformations included increased from 119 in the asthma group to 901, and from 66 in the control group to 1313.