ArticleEnvironmental research2017
Calls to Florida Poison Control Centers about mercury: Trends over 2003-2013.
Article in Environmental research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this analysis was to contrast trends in exposure-report calls and informational queries (a measure of public interest) about mercury to the Florida Poison Control Centers over 2003-2013. MATERIALS AND
methodsPoison-control specialists coded calls to Florida Poison Control Centers by substance of concern, caller demographics, and whether the call pertained to an exposure event or was an informational query. For the present study, call records regarding mercury were de-identified and provided along with daily total number of calls for statistical analysis. We fit Poisson models using generalized estimating equations to summarize changes across years in counts of daily calls to Florida Poison Control Centers, adjusting for month. In a second stage of analysis, we further adjusted for the total number of calls each day. We also conducted analyses stratified by age of the exposed.
resultsThere was an overall decrease over 2003-2013 in the number of total calls about mercury [Ratio per year: 0.89, 95% CI: (0.88, 0.90)], and calls about mercury exposure [Ratio per year: 0.84, 95% CI: (0.83, 0.85)], but the number of informational queries about mercury increased over this time [Ratio per year: 1.15 (95% CI: 1.12, 1.18)]. After adjusting for the number of calls of that type each day (e.g., call volume), the associations remained similar: a ratio of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.87, 0.89) per year for total calls, 0.85 (0.83, 0.86) for exposure-related calls, and 1.17 (1.14, 1.21) for informational queries.
conclusionAlthough, the number of exposure-related calls decreased, informational queries increased over 2003-2013. This might suggest an increased public interest in mercury health risks despite a decrease in reported exposures over this time period.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.