title: The study of the effects of ionizing and non-ionizing radiations on birth weight of newborns to exposed mothers.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Life evolved in an environment filled with a wide variety of ionizing and non-ionizing radiation. It was previously reported that medical exposures to pregnant women increases the risk of low birth weight. This study intends to investigate the relationship between exposure to ionizing and non-ionizing radiation and the risk of low birth weight.
  
  
  METHODS
  One thousand two hundred mothers with their first-term labor (vaginal or cesarean) whose newborns' history had been registered in neonates' screening program in Shiraz were interviewed and surveyed. Data collection was performed by the assessment of mother's history of radiography before and during pregnancy, physical examination of the mother for height and weight and weighing and examining the newborn for any diagnosis of disease and anomalies.
  
  
  RESULTS
  There were no statistical significant differences between the mean weight of newborns whose mothers had been exposed to some common sources of ionizing and non-ionizing radiations such as dental or non dental radiographies, mobile phone, cordless phone and cathode ray tube (CRT) and those of non-exposed mothers.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The findings of this study cast doubt on previous reports, which indicated that exposure to ionizing radiation during pregnancy increased the risk of low birth weight.
authors: Department of Medical Physics and Medical Engineering, School of Medicine, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran ; The Center for Research on Radiological Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.
authors: S M J
authors: SM
authors: Mortazavi
authors: K R
authors: KR
authors: Shirazi
authors: G
authors: G
authors: Mortazavi
keywords: Ionizing radiation; low birth weight; non-ionizing radiation; pregnancy; term labor
references: Gen Dent. 1991 Jul-Aug;39(4):264-70
references: 1916200
references: JAMA. 2004 Apr 28;291(16):1987-93
references: 15113817
references: J Nucl Med. 1996 Apr;37(4):606-12
references: 8691249
references: Public Health Rep. 1984 Mar-Apr;99(2):146-51
references: 6424163
references: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2009 Aug;18(8):2239-47
references: 19661083
references: Semin Perinatol. 2004 Feb;28(1):41-50
references: 15058901
references: J Clin Oncol. 2010 Jun 10;28(17):2824-30
references: 20458053
references: Eur J Cancer. 2007 Sep;43(13):1890-4
references: 17689068
references: Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2004 Jun;44(3):191-6
references: 15191441
references: Biomed Pharmacother. 1991;45(6):233-41
references: 1912379
references: Eur J Nucl Med. 1993 Mar;20(3):192-4
references: 8462605
references: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Oct;187(4):1070-80
references: 12389007
references: Am Fam Physician. 2008 Apr 15;77(8):1139-44
references: 18481562
references: Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Nov;116(5):1171-83
references: 20966703
references: J Clin Oncol. 2009 May 10;27(14):2374-81
references: 19364956
references: Bioelectromagnetics. 2007 May;28(4):326-30
references: 17330851
references: Bull World Health Organ. 2014 Sep 1;92(9):672-9
references: 25378758
references: Hum Fertil (Camb). 2002 May;5(2):61-6
references: 12082209
references: Reprod Toxicol. 2005 Sep-Oct;20(3):323-9
references: 15925481
references: J Nucl Med. 2008 May;49(5):845-52
references: 18413399
references: J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006 Oct 18;98(20):1453-61
references: 17047194
references: Technol Health Care. 2011;19(6):435-43
references: 22129944
references: Pak J Biol Sci. 2008 Apr 15;11(8):1142-6
references: 18819554
references: Acta Neurol Belg. 2012 Jun;112(2):171-5
references: 22426673
references: Epidemiology. 1998 May;9(3):271-8
references: 9583418