MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111493710 · doi:10.2214/ajr.182.5.1821107

Physicians' Perceptions of Teratogenic Risk Associated with Radiography and CT During Early Pregnancy

2004· article· en· W2111493710 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Roentgenology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiation Dose and Imaging
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAbortionRadiographyPregnancyObstetricsRadiation exposureRadiologyNuclear medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to determine family physicians' and obstetricians' perceptions of the risk of major fetal malformations associated with exposure to radiation from radiography and CT during early pregnancy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Structured questionnaires were sent to 400 family physicians and 100 obstetricians selected randomly across Ontario, Canada. The physicians were informed about the 1-3% baseline risk for major malformations and were asked about their perceptions of the risk to the fetus associated with an abdominal radiograph and an abdominal CT scan during early pregnancy and whether they would recommend a therapeutic abortion after such exposure. RESULTS: Fifty-five percent (218/400) of the family physicians and 69% (69/100) of the obstetricians responded to our questionnaire. Forty-four percent of family physicians estimated the risk associated with an abdominal radiograph to be 5% or greater, and 61% estimated the risk associated with an abdominal CT scan to be 5% or greater. Eleven percent of obstetricians estimated the risk associated with radiographs to be 5% or greater (p < 0.001), and 34% estimated the risk associated with CT scans to be 5% or greater (p < 0.001). Among family physicians, 1% recommended an abortion if the fetus was exposed to radiation from radiography and 6% after exposure to radiation from CT. None of the obstetricians recommended an abortion after exposure to radiation from an abdominal radiograph, but 5% recommended an abortion after exposure to radiation from an abdominal CT scan in early pregnancy. CONCLUSION: Our survey shows that physicians who care for pregnant women perceive the teratogenic risk associated with an abdominal radiograph and an abdominal CT scan to be unrealistically high during early pregnancy. This misperception could lead to increased anxiety among pregnant women seeking counseling and to unnecessary terminations of otherwise wanted pregnancies. This perception of high teratogenic risk associated with radiation could also lead to a delay in needed care of pregnant women.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.213 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it