ArticleBMJ case reports2013
Swallowed magnets and batteries: a dangerous but not unexpected attraction.
Article in BMJ case reports, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical management of pediatric multiple magnet ingestions in the past two decades of minimal access surgery- systematic review of operative approaches.Updates in surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Entero-Enteric Fistula Following Multiple Magnet Ingestion in Children: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Takes two to tango.BMJ case reports · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An 18-month-old boy was witnessed swallowing a cluster of five magnetic toy balls. He was coincidentally noted on plain x-rays to have also recently swallowed a watch battery and a small screw. Initial outpatient management with serial review and x-rays was unsuccessful, and delayed inpatient surgical care by 9 days. Although the child never manifested features of systemic or gastrointestinal upset, emergency laparotomy confirmed a resultant jejunocolic fistula. This case demonstrates how clinical assessment of children who have swallowed magnets separately from each other can be falsely reassuring, and highlights the potential dangers of outpatient management. We recommend children who have swallowed separately >1 magnetic objects (or >1 objects capable of magnetic attraction) be managed as inpatients with active observation and timely foreign body removal.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.