Radiodiagnostic imaging in pregnancy and the risk of childhood malignancy: raising the bar.

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Diagnosis and Management of Cancers in Pregnancy: The Results of a Dual Battle Between Oncological Condition and Maternal Environment-Literature Review.Cancers · 2025
   Review
2. X-RAY AND MOLECULAR IMAGING DURING PREGNANCY AND BREASTFEEDING-WHEN SHOULD WE BE WORRIED?Radiation protection dosimetry · 2021
   Review
3. Multidisciplinary consensus on cancer management during pregnancy.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2021
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Major radiodiagnostic imaging in pregnancy and the risk of childhood malignancy: a population-based cohort study in Ontario.2010

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

Indexed as