Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35736986›Full record

ReviewTropical medicine and infectious disease2022

A Contemporary Exploration of Traditional Indian Snake Envenomation Therapies.

Adwait M Deshpande, K Venkata Sastry, Satish B Bhise

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Tropical medicine and infectious disease, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
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

3 authors.

Adwait M DeshpandeSinhgad Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 309/310, Kusgaon (BK), Lonavala 410401, India.ORCID 0000-0001-9280-4871
K Venkata SastryAlliance Institute of Advanced Pharmaceutical & Health Sciences, Patel Nagar, Kukatpally, Hyderabad 500085, India.
Satish B BhiseSinhgad Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 309/310, Kusgaon (BK), Lonavala 410401, India.ORCID 0000-0001-8388-9885

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Snakebite being a quick progressing serious situation needs immediate and aggressive therapy. Snake venom antiserum is the only approved and effective treatment available, but for selected snake species only. The requirement of trained staff for administration and serum reactions make the therapy complicated. In tropical countries where snakebite incidence is high and healthcare facilities are limited, mortality and morbidities associated with snake envenomation are proportionately high. Traditional compilations of medical practitioners' personal journals have wealth of plant-based snake venom antidotes. Relatively, very few plants or their extractives have been scientifically investigated for neutralization of snake venom or its components. None of these investigations presents enough evidence to initiate clinical testing of the agents. This review focuses on curating Indian traditional snake envenomation therapies, identifying plants involved and finding relevant evidence across modern literature to neutralize snake venom components. Traditional formulations, their method of preparation and dosing have been discussed along with the investigational approach in modern research and their possible outcomes. A safe and easily administrable small molecule of plant origin that would protect or limit the spread of venom and provide valuable time for the victim to reach the healthcare centre would be a great lifesaver.

Indexed as

Daboia russeliilife saverNaja najaneglected tropical diseaseplant-based antidotesnake envenomationtraditional therapies

Identifiers

PMID35736986
PMCPMC9227218
OpenAlexW4283157612

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.