Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28683119›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2017

The socio-economic burden of snakebite in Sri Lanka.

Anuradhani Kasturiratne, Arunasalam Pathmeswaran, A Rajitha Wickremasinghe, Shaluka F Jayamanne, Andrew Dawson, Geoff K Isbister, Hithanadura Janaka de Silva, David G Lalloo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Cost of Snakebite and Its Impact on Household Economy in Southern Nepal.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2025
    Article
  12. Reported snakebite mortality and state compensation payments in Madhya Pradesh, India, from 2020 to 2022.Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Managing snakebite.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2022
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Anuradhani KasturiratneFaculty of Medicine, University of Kelaniya, Ragama, Sri Lanka.
Arunasalam PathmeswaranFaculty of Medicine, University of Kelaniya, Ragama, Sri Lanka.
A Rajitha WickremasingheFaculty of Medicine, University of Kelaniya, Ragama, Sri Lanka.
Shaluka F JayamanneFaculty of Medicine, University of Kelaniya, Ragama, Sri Lanka.
Andrew DawsonSouth Asian Clinical Toxicology Research Collaboration (SACTRC), Faculty of Medicine, University of Peradeniya, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka.
Geoff K IsbisterSouth Asian Clinical Toxicology Research Collaboration (SACTRC), Faculty of Medicine, University of Peradeniya, Peradeniya, Sri Lanka.
Hithanadura Janaka de SilvaFaculty of Medicine, University of Kelaniya, Ragama, Sri Lanka.
David G LallooLiverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7680-2200

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSnakebite is a major problem affecting the rural poor in many of the poorest countries in the tropics. However, the scale of the socio-economic burden has rarely been studied. We undertook a comprehensive assessment of the burden in Sri Lanka.

methodsData from a representative nation-wide community based household survey were used to estimate the number of bites and deaths nationally, and household and out of pocket costs were derived from household questionnaires. Health system costs were obtained from hospital cost accounting systems and estimates of antivenom usage. DALYs lost to snakebite were estimated using standard approaches using disability weights for poisoning.

findings79% of victims suffered economic loss following a snakebite with a median out of pocket expenditure of $11.82 (IQR 2-28.57) and a median estimated loss of income of $28.57 and $33.21 for those in employment or self-employment, respectively. Family members also lost income to help care for patients. Estimated health system costs for Sri Lanka were $ 10,260,652 annually. The annual estimated total number of DALYS was 11,101 to 15,076 per year for envenoming following snakebite.

interpretationSnakebite places a considerable economic burden on the households of victims in Sri Lanka, despite a health system which is accessible and free at the point of care. The disability burden is also considerable, similar to that of meningitis or dengue, although the relatively low case fatality rate and limited physical sequelae following bites by Sri Lankan snakes means that this burden may be less than in countries on the African continent.

Indexed as

Health Care CostsAnimalsAntiveninsHumansIncomeSnake BitesSri LankaAntivenins

Identifiers

PMID28683119
PMCPMC5500261

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.