FIGURE LEGENDS
Figure 1. Flow chart for the systematic review.
Figure 2. Forest plots of risk ratio for preeclampsia in women of black racial origin compared to white women with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and weighted pooled summary statistics using bivariate random-effects model.
Figure 3. Forest plots of odds ratio for preeclampsia in women of black racial origin compared to white women with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and pooled summary statistics using bivariate random-effects model.
Figure S1. Summary of the quality of included studies using the quality in prognostic studies (QUIPS) tool.
Figure S2. Forest plots of risk ratio for preeclampsia in women of South Asian racial origin compared to white women with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and weighted pooled summary statistics using bivariate random-effects model.
Figure S3. Forest plots of risk ratio for preeclampsia in women of East Asian racial origin compared to white women with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and weighted pooled summary statistics using bivariate random-effects model.
Figure S4. Funnel plots demonstrating assessment of publication bias of studies reporting on the incidence of preeclampsia in women of black and white racial origin. Each dot represents a study; the y-axis represents study precision (standard error) derived from the number of experimental subjects and the x-axis shows the study’s result (risk ratio).
Figure S5. Forest plots of odds ratio for preeclampsia in women of South Asian racial origin compared to white women with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and pooled summary statistics using bivariate random-effects model.
Figure S6. Forest plots of odds ratio for preeclampsia in women of East Asian racial origin compared to white women with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and pooled summary statistics using bivariate random-effects model.
Table 1. Characteristics of the study population