Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37467278›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2023

Antivenom preclinical efficacy testing against Asian snakes and their availability in Asia: A systematic review.

Sutinee Soopairin, Chanthawat Patikorn, Suthira Taychakhoonavudh

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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.

Sutinee SoopairinDepartment of Social and Administrative Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-2713-9614
Chanthawat PatikornDepartment of Social and Administrative Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-3502-4718
Suthira TaychakhoonavudhDepartment of Social and Administrative Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-9066-274X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCross-neutralizing strategy has been applied to improve access to antivenoms, a key to reducing mortality and disability of snakebite envenoming. However, preclinical studies have been conducted to identify antivenoms' cross-neutralizing ability when clinical studies may not be considered ethical. Therefore, this study aimed to identify and summarize scattered evidence regarding the preclinical efficacy of antivenoms against Asian snakes. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPLE

findingsIn this systematic review, we searched for articles published until May 30, 2022, in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase. Preclinical studies that reported the available antivenoms' neutralizing ability against Asian snake lethality were included. Quality assessment was performed using the Systematic Review Centre for Laboratory animal Experimentation's risk of bias tool and the adapted the Animal Research Reporting In Vivo Experiments guidelines. The availability of effective antivenoms against Asian snakes was analyzed by comparing data from included studies with snakebite-information and data platforms developed by the World Health Organization. Fifty-two studies were included. Most studies assessed the antivenom efficacy against snakes from Southeast Asia (58%), followed by South Asia (35%) and East Asia (19%). Twenty-two (49%) medically important snakes had antivenom(s) with confirmed neutralizing ability. Situation analyses of the availability of effective antivenoms in Asia demonstrated that locally produced antivenoms did not cover all medically important snakes in each country. Among countries without local antivenom production, preclinical studies were conducted only in Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Malaysia. Risk of bias assessment was limited in some domains because of unreported data. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Cross-neutralizing of antivenoms against some medically important snakes in Asia was confirmed. This strategy may improve access to geographically effective antivenoms and bypass investment in novel antivenom development, especially in countries without local antivenom production. A database should be developed to aid the development of a snakebite-information system.

Indexed as

AntiveninsSnake BitesAnimalsAsia, EasternSnakesSri LankaAntivenins

Identifiers

PMID37467278
PMCPMC10355433

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.