ArticleClinical toxicology (Philadelphia, Pa.)2024
Characterization of patients with a snakebite presenting to healthcare facilities and reported to poison and drug information centers-Arizona, 2017-2021.
Article in Clinical toxicology (Philadelphia, Pa.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Long-Term Clinical Outcomes of Rattlesnake Envenomation in Arizona Following Treatment With Crofab vs Anavip: A Retrospective Observational Study.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionEnvenomation after a North American rattlesnake (
methodsWe identified patients with a snakebite during 2017-2021 using Arizona hospital and emergency department discharge data and snakebite consults with two regional Arizona poison centers. Patients were matched using name and birthdate. The performance of poison center data for snakebite surveillance was evaluated using the percentage of snakebite patients in hospital and emergency department discharge data that consulted with poison centers. Patient demographics, healthcare characteristics, clinical effects, and context of snakebite events were described using both datasets.
resultsIn total, 1,288 patients with a snakebite were identified using the Arizona hospital and emergency department discharge data, which resulted in 953 (74%) consultations with poison centers. The median age of patients was 48 years (IQR 28-62 years), and they were predominantly male (66%), White (90%), and non-Hispanic (84%). The median billed charges were US$ 84,880 (IQR US$ 13,286-US$ 168,043); the median duration of a healthcare stay was 34 h (IQR 13-48 h), and 29% of patients were transferred between healthcare facilities. Among 953 consulted poison center calls for a snakebite, a median of 14 vials of antivenom was administered per patient; 375 (60%) bites occurred near the home, and 345 (43%) patients were bitten on a lower extremity. One death was identified. DISCUSSION: Snakebites in Arizona can cause severe morbidity and require extensive healthcare resources for treatment. Poison centers are valuable for monitoring venomous snakebites in Arizona.
conclusionsUsing hospital and emergency department discharge data with poison center records can improve public health surveillance data regarding snakebite epidemiology and human-snake interaction information and be used to tailor interventions to increase awareness of snake encounters and prevent snakebites.
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.