Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25846606›Full record

ArticleBirth defects research. Part A, Clinical and molecular teratology2016

Residential radon and birth defects: A population-based assessment.

Peter H Langlois, MinJae Lee, Philip J Lupo, Mohammad H Rahbar, Ruben K Cortez

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Birth defects research. Part A, Clinical and molecular teratology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Residential Radon Exposure and Incidence of Childhood Lymphoma in Texas, 1995-2011.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2015
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Peter H LangloisBirth Defects Epidemiology and Surveillance Branch, Texas Department of State Health Services, Austin, Texas.
MinJae LeeDivision of Clinical and Translational Sciences, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical School, and Biostatistics/Epidemiology/Research Design (BERD) Core, Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences (CCTS), The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas.
Philip J LupoDepartment of Pediatrics, Section of Hematology-Oncology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas.
Mohammad H RahbarDivision of Clinical and Translational Sciences, Department of Internal Medicine, Medical School, Division of Epidemiology, Human Genetics and Environmental Sciences, School of Public Health, and Biostatistics/Epidemiology/Research Design (BERD) Core, Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences (CCTS), The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas.
Ruben K CortezRadiation Branch, Texas Department of State Health Services, Austin, Texas.
Texas Department of State Health Services · USThe University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston · USBaylor College of Medicine · US

Funding

Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences (CCTS)UL1TR000371 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI MCPHERSON, DAVID D · 2012 to 2016
$13.4M
Texas Center for Birth Defects Research and PreventionU01DD000494 · DD · TEXAS STATE DEPT OF HEALTH SERVICES · PI CANFIELD, MARK A · 2009 to 2013
$3.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000371NCBDD CDC HHS U01 DD000494NCBDD CDC HHS U01DD000494NIDCR NIH HHS R03 DE02173901
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAssociations have been reported between maternal radiation exposure and birth defects. No such studies were found on radon. Our objective was to determine if there is an association between living in areas with higher radon levels and birth defects.

methodsThe Texas Birth Defects Registry provided data on all birth defects from 1999 to 2009 from the entire state. Mean radon levels by geologic region came from the Texas Indoor Radon Survey. The association between radon and birth defects was estimated using multilevel mixed effect Poisson regression.

resultsBirth defects overall were not associated with residential radon levels. Of the 100 other birth defect groups with at least 500 cases, 14 were significantly elevated in areas with high mean radon level in crude analyses, and 9 after adjustment for confounders. Cleft lip with/without cleft palate had an adjusted prevalence ratio of 1.16 per 1 picoCurie/liter (pCi/L) increase in exposure to region mean radon, 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.26. Cystic hygroma / lymphangioma had an adjusted prevalence ratio of 1.22 per 1 pCi/L increase, 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.46. Other associations were suggested but not as consistent: three skeletal defects, Down syndrome, other specified anomalies of the brain, and other specified anomalies of the bladder and urethra.

conclusionIn the first study of residential radon and birth defects, we found associations with cleft lip w/wo cleft palate and cystic hygroma / lymphangioma. Other associations were suggested. The ecological nature of this study and multiple comparisons suggest that our results be interpreted with caution.

Indexed as

AdultCleft LipCleft PalateFemaleHumansLymphangiomaLymphangioma, CysticMaleMaternal ExposurePrevalenceRadiation ExposureRadonRegistriesRegression AnalysisTexasRadonbirth defectscleft lipmalformationsradiationRadonTexas

Identifiers

PMID25846606
PMCPMC4595158
OpenAlexW1606738174

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.