ArticleBMJ case reports2024
Water beads ingestion presenting with repeated bowel obstruction in an infant.
Article in BMJ case reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pediatric Water Bead Ingestion: Experience from a Quaternary Care Children's Hospital and a Proposed Management Algorithm.Journal of pediatrics. Clinical practice · 2026Article
- Superabsorbent polymer beads ingestion by children: a single-center retrospective study of 11 cases.BMC pediatrics · 2026Article
- Tiny Beads, Big Problems: Water Bead Ingestions-A Case Series.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Water beads: Expanding toy and 'new' problem for paediatric surgeons and community.Journal of paediatrics and child health · 2025Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An infant presented repeatedly with features of transient bowel obstruction 72 hours after unwitnessed ingestion of water beads. At the third presentation 5 days later, he underwent laparotomy and jejunal enterotomy for retrieval of obstructing water bead in the duodenum. Four other water beads were retrieved. Due to persistent obstructive symptoms, he had a relaparotomy on fourth postoperative day. A further obstructing bead at the duodenojejunal flexure was retrieved. Antegrade upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and retrograde endoscopy through the enterotomy were performed to ensure no further retained water beads. The patient progressed well postoperatively and was discharged home 5 days later. This case highlights the challenges involved in the diagnosis and management of water bead ingestion in children. Children under 2 years are at a higher risk of complications and most require intervention. Palpation alone can miss residual water beads at surgery. Endoscopy including intraoperative enteroscopy could be a useful adjunct.
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.