ArticleCureus2026
Multiple Magnet Ingestion in a Child With an Overlooked Diagnosis Leading to Intestinal Perforation.
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Clinical characteristics and therapeutic experiences of magnetic foreign body ingestion in children: a single-center retrospective study.Translational pediatrics · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Foreign body (FB) ingestion is common in children below six years of age. Most FBs are passed spontaneously through the gastrointestinal tract. However, multiple magnetic ingestion increases the risk of intestinal obstruction and perforation via magnetic attraction through bowel walls. We report a case of a four-year-old boy who came with a delayed presentation of multiple magnet ingestion over a year before presentation to the emergency department. The diagnosis was overlooked in the first presentation by the primary health care doctor, and the FBs in the X-ray were interpreted as being an artifact. This case underscores the need for increased clinician awareness of having a high index of suspicion of FB ingestion in pediatric cases presenting with prolonged vague abdominal pain and to be vigilant upon reviewing radiological images.
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.