Trial reportPloS one2017
Radiation Exposure from Diagnostic Imaging in a Cohort of Pediatric Transplant Recipients.
Trial report in PloS one, 2017. 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.
- Cumulative radiation doses due to nuclear medicine examinations: a systematic review.The British journal of radiology · 2021Pooled it
- Cumulative ionizing radiation exposure in pediatric patients with chronic diseases: a narrative review.Pediatric radiology · 2026Review
- Multinational data on cumulative radiation exposure of patients from recurrent radiological procedures: call for action.European radiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recipients of solid organ transplants (SOT) have extensive diagnostic imaging (DI). The purpose of this study was to quantify this exposure. Children from northern Alberta with SOTs at Stollery Children's Hospital, Edmonton, Alberta January 1, 2006, to July 31, 2012, were included. Effective doses of radiation were estimated using published norms for DI performed post-transplant up to October 16, 2014. The 54 eligible children had 6215 DI studies (5628 plain films, 293 computerized tomography (CT) scans, 149 positron emission topography (PET) -CT scans, 47 nuclear medicine scans and 98 cardiac catheterizations). Children less than 5 years of age underwent more DI studies than did older children (median (IQR) 140 (66-210) vs 49 (19-105), p = 0.010). Children with post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder (N = 8) had more CT scans (median (IQR) 13 (5.5-36) vs 1 (0-5), p<0.001) and PET-CT scans (median (IQR) 3.5 (1.5-8) vs 0 (0-0), p<0.001) than did other children. The estimated cumulative effective dose attributed to DI studies post-transplant was median (range) 78 (4.1-400) millisievert (mSv), and 19 of 54 children (35%; 95% confidence interval 24-49%) had a dose >100 mSv. In conclusion, a significant proportion of pediatric transplant recipients have sufficient radiation exposure post-transplant for DI to be at potential risk for radiation-induced malignancies.
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.