Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35913560›Full record

SynthesisInternational archives of occupational and environmental health2023

Low-dose ionizing radiation and adverse birth outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Brianna Frangione, Patrick Hinton, Paul J Villeneuve

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International archives of occupational and environmental health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Brianna FrangioneDepartment of Neuroscience, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6, Canada.
Patrick HintonDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Paul J VilleneuveDepartment of Neuroscience, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6, Canada. Paul.Villeneuve@carleton.ca.
Queen's University · CAUniversité Bourgogne Franche-Comté · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveIonizing radiation is a human carcinogen, and there is evidence that exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation increases the risk of adverse birth outcomes.

methodsWe undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to synthesize the research of maternal and paternal exposure to low-dose radiation on low birth weight, miscarriage, pre-term delivery, and stillbirth. Our literature search used four databases (PubMed, Environmental Index, GeoBASE, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature). We included study populations exposed to occupational and medical sources of radiation, nuclear disasters, and those living near nuclear power plants. We considered papers published between January 1st, 1990, and June 30th, 2021. The quality of the studies was assessed, and we performed meta-analysis using random effects models to generate summary measures of association. Forest plots were created to assess the heterogeneity in these measures, and funnel plots were used to assess publication bias.

resultsOverall, 26 studies were identified, and these yielded measures of association from 10, 11, and 8 studies for low birth weight, miscarriage, and stillbirth outcomes, respectively. It was not possible to perform meta-analyses for pre-term delivery due to a small number of studies. The meta-analysis summary relative risk (RR) of having a low-birth-weight infant among those ever exposed to radiation relative to those unexposed, after adjusting for publication bias, was 1.29 (95% CI 0.97-1.73). The corresponding risk estimates for miscarriage and stillbirth were 1.15 (95% CI 1.02-1.30), and 1.19 (95% CI 0.98-1.45), respectively.

conclusionsOur findings suggest that ionizing radiation increases the risk of adverse birth outcomes. Future work should strive to provide data needed to better understand the shape of the exposure-response curve.

Indexed as

Abortion, SpontaneousPregnancy ComplicationsPremature BirthFemaleHumansInfant, Low Birth WeightInfant, NewbornMalePregnancyStillbirthBirth outcomesBirth weightLow-dose radiationMeta-analysisSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35913560
PMCPMC9823032
OpenAlexW4289131086

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.