Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38807800›Full record

ReviewCureus2024

Assessing the Efficacy of RADPAD Protection Drape in Reducing Radiation Exposure to Operators in the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Abdul Rasheed Bahar, Resha Khanal, Mohammad Hamza, Rohit K Goru, Aimen Shafiq, Mobeen Z Haider, Salman Abdul Basit, Yasemin Bahar, Ahmed Muaaz Umer, Yasar Sattar and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Radiation Exposure During Contrast-Enhanced Videofluoroscopic Swallow Studies in Dogs and Cats.Veterinary radiology & ultrasound : the official journal of the American College of Veterinary Radiology and the International Veterinary Radiology Association · 2025
    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

11 authors.

Abdul Rasheed BaharInternal Medicine, Wayne State University Detroit Medical Center, Detroit, USA.
Resha KhanalInternal Medicine, Wayne State University Detroit Medical Center, Detroit, USA.
Mohammad HamzaInternal Medicine, Guthrie Cortland Medical Center, Cortland, USA.
Rohit K GoruInternal Medicine, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, USA.
Aimen ShafiqInternal Medicine, Dow University of Health Sciences, Karachi, PAK.
Mobeen Z HaiderInternal Medicine, Carle Foundation Hospital, Urbana, USA.
Salman Abdul BasitInternal Medicine, The Wright Center for Graduate Medical Education, Scranton, USA.
Yasemin BaharInternal Medicine, Wayne State University, Detroit, USA.
Ahmed Muaaz UmerInternal Medicine, Camden Clark Medical Center, Parkersburg, USA.
Yasar SattarCardiology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, USA.
M Chadi AlraiesCardiology, Wayne State University Detroit Medical Center, Detroit, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One of the leading environmental hazards, ionizing radiation, is linked to several detrimental health consequences in the body. RADPAD (Worldwide Innovations & Technologies, Inc., Kansas City, Kansas) is a sterile, lead-free, lightweight, disposable radiation protection shield. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effectiveness of RADPAD protection drapes in the cardiac catheterization lab and how they can aid interventional cardiologists in becoming subjected to less scatter radiation. PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched for studies discussing the efficacy of RADPAD protection drapes in reducing radiation exposure to operators in the cardiac catheterization laboratory. A random-effects model was used to pool odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for endpoints: primary operator exposure dose, dose area product (DAP), relative exposure, and screening time. Our analysis included 892 patients from six studies. Compared to the No-RADPAD group, primary operator exposure dose (E) was significantly lower in the RADPAD group (OR: -0.9, 95% CI: -1.36 to -0.43, I

Indexed as

cath labinterventional cardiologistsradiation preventionradiation safetyradpad

Identifiers

PMID38807800
PMCPMC11132176

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.