ArticleToxicon: X2021
Access to antivenoms in the developing world: A multidisciplinary analysis.
Article in Toxicon: X, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers.
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
49 citing papers in PubMed, 92 citations in OpenAlex.
- The disease that bites - an assessment of demographics, clinical characteristics, and treatment practices of patients with snakebite envenoming across Vietnam.Journal of global health · 2026Article
- Estimating the distributional impact of improving access to snake antivenom in urban and rural Lao People's Democratic Republic: An extended cost-effectiveness analysis.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- Clinical epidemiology of snakebite envenoming in hospitals 11 provinces of Yangtze River Basin and southern regions of China: A retrospective hospital-based analysis.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- Toxicological profiling of venoms from ten major Chinese snakes: a mass spectrometry-based proteomic and multiroute assessment.Archives of toxicology · 2026Article
- Venomics across theJournal of proteome research · 2026Article
- Assessing territorial disparities in snakebite surveillance data in Brazil: Implications for public health.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Article
- From scarcity to sustainability: Policy pathways for equitable snakebite antivenom access in Africa.PLOS global public health · 2026Review
- Outcomes Associated With the Timing of Antivenom Administration in Bothrops and Crotalus Snakebite Envenomations.Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical · 2026Article
- Analyzing first aid in textbooks used by non-medical and paramedical students in Nepal: A need of further attention for snakebite management!PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2025Article
- Emerging strategies for monkeypox: antigen and antibody applications in diagnostics, vaccines, and treatments.Military Medical Research · 2025Review
- Article
- Mapping Evidence on the Regulations Affecting the Accessibility, Availability, and Management of Snake Antivenom Globally: A Scoping Review.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Review
- Treatment and treatment outcomes of snakebite envenoming in Uganda: a retrospective analysis.Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2025Article
- Applying Ensemble Ecological Niche Modeling to Identify High Risk Areas for Scorpions' Sting.Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Computational Strategies for Broad Spectrum Venom Phospholipase AJournal of chemical information and modeling · 2025Article
- Article
- The epidemiology of snakebites, treatment-seeking behaviour, and snakebite management in the department of Ogooué et des Lacs, Gabon, Central Africa: a cross-sectional community and health facility-based survey.Journal of global health · 2025Article
- Metabolomics and proteomics: synergistic tools for understanding snake venom inhibition.Archives of toxicology · 2025Review
- Challenges and management of venomous bites and scorpion stings in Lebanon: a qualitative study.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors at 10 institutions in 8 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Access to safe, effective, quality-assured antivenom products that are tailored to endemic venomous snake species is a crucial component of recent coordinated efforts to reduce the global burden of snakebite envenoming. Multiple access barriers may affect the journey of antivenoms from manufacturers to the bedsides of patients. Our review describes the antivenom ecosystem at different levels and identifies solutions to overcome these challenges. At the global level, there is insufficient manufacturing output to meet clinical needs, notably for antivenoms intended for use in regions with a scarcity of producers. At national level, variable funding and deficient regulation of certain antivenom markets can lead to the procurement of substandard antivenom. This is particularly true when producers fail to seek registration of their products in the countries where they should be used, or where weak assessment frameworks allow registration without local clinical evaluation. Out-of-pocket expenses by snakebite victims are often the main source of financing antivenoms, which results in the underuse or under-dosing of antivenoms, and a preference for low-cost products regardless of efficacy. In resource-constrained rural areas, where the majority of victims are bitten, supply of antivenom in peripheral health facilities is often unreliable. Misconceptions about treatment of snakebite envenoming are common, further reducing demand for antivenom and exacerbating delays in reaching facilities equipped for antivenom use. Multifaceted interventions are needed to improve antivenom access in resource-limited settings. Particular attention should be paid to the comprehensive list of actions proposed within the WHO Strategy for Prevention and Control of Snakebite Envenoming.
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.