gr.euronews.com
Increased Miscarriage Risk Linked to CT Scans Before Pregnancy
A large Canadian study found women who had CT scans in the month before pregnancy faced a higher risk of miscarriage and babies with genetic abnormalities, prompting calls for prioritizing alternative imaging methods for women of childbearing age.
- What are the potential confounding factors and limitations of the study?
- The study acknowledges that women with pre-existing health conditions (smoking, diabetes, hypertension, obesity) were more likely to have CT scans, potentially influencing the results. Data gaps on lifetime CT scan exposure and other underlying medical issues affecting birth outcomes are also noted. Researchers suggest that pre-existing health problems may have necessitated the CT scans in the first place.
- What are the recommendations for future practice based on these findings?
- Given the potential increased risks, the study authors and independent experts recommend prioritizing alternative imaging techniques like MRI and ultrasound for women of childbearing age or those planning pregnancy. Further research is needed to confirm whether the increased risks are directly caused by CT scans or pre-existing conditions prompting the scans.
- What is the primary finding of the Canadian study regarding CT scans and pregnancy outcomes?
- The study of over 5.1 million pregnancies and 3.4 million live births in Canada (1992-2023) revealed a correlation between the number of CT scans women received in the month prior to conception and increased risks of miscarriage and birth defects. For women with three or more scans, miscarriage rates were 142 per 1,000 pregnancies, and birth defect rates were 105 per 1,000 births, compared to 101 and 62 respectively in women who did not have a CT scan.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article presents the study's findings clearly, focusing on the increased risks of miscarriage and birth defects associated with CT scans before pregnancy. The potential confounding factors, such as pre-existing health conditions leading to the need for CT scans, are acknowledged. However, the emphasis on the potential risks of CT scans might overshadow the importance of diagnosing life-threatening conditions. The headline, if it existed, could heavily influence the reader's interpretation, potentially causing unnecessary anxiety among women of childbearing age.
Language Bias
The language used is largely neutral and objective. Terms like "increased risk" and "potential association" are used accurately. However, phrases such as "more likely to experience miscarriage" could be perceived as alarmist. More precise language, specifying the magnitude of the increased risk, would enhance objectivity.
Bias by Omission
The article mentions that women with pre-existing conditions were more likely to undergo CT scans. However, a deeper exploration of these conditions and their individual contribution to miscarriage or birth defects would strengthen the analysis. Further, the long-term effects on children born after maternal CT scans are not discussed. The lack of discussion about the benefits of CT scans in diagnosing and treating life-threatening conditions could create an incomplete picture of the risk-benefit profile.
Sustainable Development Goals
The study directly impacts SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) by highlighting the negative effects of CT scans on pregnancy outcomes. Increased risks of miscarriage and birth defects due to radiation exposure from CT scans directly affect maternal and child health, hindering progress towards SDG target 3.2 which aims to reduce maternal mortality and ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive healthcare services. The findings underscore the need for safer alternatives in medical imaging for women of childbearing age.