Supplemental figure 1: Search strategy used in this review.
(((((contraceptives, oral OR ((contraception OR contracept*) AND pill)) AND (progestin* OR progestational, hormones, synthetic OR progestogen* OR progesterone OR gestagen OR "progestin only" OR "progestogen only" OR "progestrogen only pill" OR minipill))) AND ((((((cardiovascular disease[MeSH Terms] OR heart disease OR stroke OR cerebrovascular disease OR cardiovascular disease OR coronary artery disease OR heart failure OR cardiovascular mortality OR coronary death OR CHD OR CVD OR cardiac death OR myocardial infarction OR angina))) OR ((diabetes OR diabetes mellitus OR DM OR T2DM OR T1DM))) OR (((("venous thromboembolism" OR VTE OR thromboembolism))) OR venous thromboembolism[MeSH Terms])) OR hypertension OR high blood pressure)))
Supplemental figure 2: Funnel plots for VTE, MI and stroke
The dotted lines show 95% confidence intervals around the overall summary estimate calculated using a random effect model; P-values using Egger’s test were 0.09; 0.99; and 0.15 for effect of POC use on VTE, MI and stroke respectively.
Supplemental table 1: Showing the New-Ottawa Scale rating for case-control studies on Venous thromboembolism, Myocardial infarction and Stroke.
Study
Case definition
Author, year
Adequate with independent validation?
Barsoum et al,2010
Selection Representativeness Selection of of the cases controls
Definition of controls
Comparability Comparability of cases and controls
Exposure Ascertainment of exposure
Non-response rate
Exposure measurement?
Same for cases and controls?
Same rate for both groups?
*
*
* (nested casecontrol) unknown
Community controls?
No history of MI, VTE, CVD, stroke?
Study controls for BMI/age?
*
Consecutive or representative? Or potential for selection bias *
*
Unknown
*
Study controls for at least 3 additional risk factors? *
Heinemann et al 1999, vte
*
*
*
*
*
No – VTE
*
No proxy interviews
Bergandal et al 2014 WHO 1999
* *
No (premenopausal) *
* No
* *
* *
*– MI No No – VTE
* *
* *
No Unknown for controls
Vasilakas et al 1999
*
*
*
*
*
*– MI No
*
*
Vleig et al 2010 Dunn et al 1999 Pettiti et al 1998 Thorogood et al 1991 Tuzorio et al 1995 Lidegaard et al,1993
* * Unknown *
* * * *
* * * *
* No Unknown No
* * * *
* * No No
* * * *
* No * *
* (nested casecontrol) * No Unknown no
* *
* *
No *
Unknown *
No *
No *
* *
* *
No *
Overall Quality Score (Maximum=9)
8 6 (VTE) 7 (MI) 6 6 (VTE) 7 (MI) 8 9 6 5 6 4 9
Supplemental table 2: Showing the New-Ottawa Scale rating for cohort studies on Venous thromboembolism, Myocardial infarction and Stroke.
Study Author, year
Representativeness of exposed Is the study population representative of the average adult in the community? e.g. are there any selection criteria for the study population which makes you think participants are nonrepresentative of the general population? Or are population selection criteria unclear? If not: award one star (*)
Selection Selection of nonAscertainment exposed of exposure Drawn from same community as the exposed? If yes: award one star (*)
Is the measurement method reported? If yes: award one star (*)
Outcome not present at outset Outcome under study not present in participants at study baseline? Is this reported explicitly or is the population described as healthy? If yes: award one star (*)
Comparability Comparability of cohorts Does the study control for age/BMI? If yes: award one star (*)
Does the study control for at least 3 additional risk factors relevant to the outcome studied? If yes: award one star (*)
Exposure Assessment of outcome Linkage to medical records OR Independent assessment medical interview If yes: award star (*)
Duration of follow-up
Adequacy of follow-up
Median or mean follow-up time of 5 years or more? If yes: award star (*) If mean/median follow-up not reported, do not award star
After agreement to participate, reporting of outcomes for all participants or an account of loss to follow-up.
If neither or insufficient information: do not award star
Overall Quality Score (Maximum=9
For studies with account of loss to follow-up: >10% deemed to introduce bias unless characteristics of loss to follow-up documented and shown to be similar to participants retained in the study. Statement of minimal loss to follow-up (
