ArticlePloS one2023
Medical imaging utilization and associated radiation exposure in children with down syndrome.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Knowledge, attitude, and practice regarding radiation exposure and protection among diagnostic radiographers in radiology departments in Shanghai, China.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Medical Imaging and Pediatric and Adolescent Hematologic Cancer Risk.The New England journal of medicine · 2025Article
- Quantifying and Contextualizing Radiation Doses in Common Pediatric Medical Imaging Examinations.Journal of pediatrics. Clinical practice · 2025Article
- Correction: Medical imaging utilization and associated radiation exposure in children with down syndrome.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
11 authors at 9 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the frequency of medical imaging or estimated associated radiation exposure in children with Down syndrome.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 4,348,226 children enrolled in six U.S. integrated healthcare systems from 1996-2016, 3,095 of whom were diagnosed with Down syndrome. We calculated imaging rates per 100 person years and associated red bone marrow dose (mGy). Relative rates (RR) of imaging in children with versus without Down syndrome were estimated using overdispersed Poisson regression.
resultsCompared to other children, children with Down syndrome received imaging using ionizing radiation at 9.5 times (95% confidence interval[CI] = 8.2-10.9) the rate when age <1 year and 2.3 times (95% CI = 2.0-2.5) between ages 1-18 years. Imaging rates by modality in children <1 year with Down syndrome compared with other children were: computed tomography (6.6 vs. 2.0, RR = 3.1[95%CI = 1.8-5.1]), fluoroscopy (37.1 vs. 3.1, RR 11.9[95%CI 9.5-14.8]), angiography (7.6 vs. 0.2, RR = 35.8[95%CI = 20.6-62.2]), nuclear medicine (6.0 vs. 0.6, RR = 8.2[95% CI = 5.3-12.7]), radiography (419.7 vs. 36.9, RR = 11.3[95%CI = 10.0-12.9], magnetic resonance imaging(7.3 vs. 1.5, RR = 4.2[95% CI = 3.1-5.8]), and ultrasound (231.2 vs. 16.4, RR = 12.6[95% CI = 9.9-15.9]). Mean cumulative red bone marrow dose from imaging over a mean of 4.2 years was 2-fold higher in children with Down syndrome compared with other children (4.7 vs. 1.9mGy).
conclusionsChildren with Down syndrome experienced more medical imaging and higher radiation exposure than other children, especially at young ages when they are more vulnerable to radiation. Clinicians should consider incorporating strategic management decisions when imaging this high-risk population.
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.