Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28283941›Full record

ReviewJournal of medical toxicology : official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology2017

Should We Be Using the Poisoning Severity Score?

Evan S Schwarz, Kathryn T Kopec, Timothy J Wiegand, Paul M Wax, Jeffrey Brent

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of medical toxicology : official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing 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

36 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine Position Statement: Approach to a Patient with Poisoning in the Emergency Room and Intensive Care Unit.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Factors associated with refusing hemoperfusion in patients with acute paraquat poisoning.Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2024
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Evan S SchwarzDivision of Emergency Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid, Campus Box 8072, Saint Louis, MO, 63110, USA. schwarze@wustl.edu.
Kathryn T KopecDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Carolinas Medical Center, Medical Education Building, Third Floor 1000 Blythe Blvd, Charlotte, NC, 28203, USA.
Timothy J WiegandDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Rochester Medical Center, 601 Elmwood Ave, Box 655, Rochester, NY, 14642, USA.
Paul M WaxDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern School of Medicine, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd, Dallas, TX, 75390, USA.
Jeffrey BrentUniversity of Colorado School of Medicine, 12605 E. 16th Ave, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDespite the existence of a number of severity-of-illness classifications for other areas of medicine, toxicology research lacks a well-accepted method for assessing the severity of poisoning. The Poisoning Severity Score (PSS) was developed in the 1990s in Europe as a scoring system for poisonings reported to a poison center in order to describe a patient's most severe symptomatology. We reviewed the literature to describe how the PSS is utilized and describe its limitations. DISCUSSION: We searched the medical literature in all languages using PUBMED, EMBASE, and SCOPUS from inception through August 2013 using predefined search terms. Out of 204 eligible publications, 40 met our criteria for inclusion in this review. There has been a paucity of published studies from North America that used the PSS. In some cases,  the PSS was misapplied or modified from standard scoring, making a bottom line appraisal of the validity or reliability of the original version of the instrument challenging. The PSS has several subjective criteria, is time consuming to score, and is likely to be of little use with some types of poisonings, limiting its clinical utility.

conclusionThe PSS was developed as a tool to document encounters with poisoned patients. However, it is used infrequently and, when applied, has been misused or modified from its original form. In its current form, it has limited clinical utility and likely cannot be broadly applied to many exposures due to their unique clinical circumstances. With better global collaboration among medical toxicologists, it is possible that a modified score could be developed for use clinically or as a research instrument.

Indexed as

Decision Support TechniquesHumansPoisoningPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisReproducibility of ResultsSeverity of Illness IndexPoisoningPoisoning Severity ScoreSeverity scoreToxic

Identifiers

PMID28283941
PMCPMC5440322

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.