ArticleJournal of medical toxicology : official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology2025
Assessment of Clinical Toxicological Resources in Countries Belonging to the World Health Organization's Regional Office of the Eastern Mediterranean.
Article in Journal of medical toxicology : official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPoison Centers are vital to prevent and manage exposures to chemicals, toxins, and ionizing radiation. However, many countries still lack sufficient poison information center services. Within the World Health Organization's Eastern Mediterranean Regional Office (EMRO) region, we were not able to identify a formal assessment of its toxicological resources. We sought to assess the clinical toxicological resources in the EMRO region and the attitudes, needs, and perspective of the workforce in that region.
methodsThis was a two part survey study. First, we developed a poison center questionnaire and scoring system based on the World Health Organization's Guidelines for Establishing a Poison Center; this instrument was administered by phone to poison center directors and faculty in the EMRO region. Questions assessed for the presence or absence of important poison center capabilities listed in the WHO guidelines, and points were assigned based on response. Secondly, we administered an electronic workforce survey to clinical toxicology professionals in the region; participant eligibility for the workforce survey was based on the membership roster of MENATOX.
resultsOut of 22 EMRO countries, 16 countries have an established poison center, and 14 of 16 participated in the poison center survey. The results reflected a wide variability in capabilities among countries. Areas such as call centers, clinical toxicology units, laboratory services, and data management were relatively lacking while some other areas including toxicovigilance, chemical incidents and emergencies, antidotes/antivenoms, poisoning information sources, and the availability of free services were relatively stronger. Twenty-seven out of 32 workforce respondents were physicians. Results from that survey highlighted a desire for more support from government and better compensation.
conclusionsOur study identified areas of need for the EMRO region. The poison center survey results reflect large disparities among countries with some areas being stronger than others. The workforce survey highlighted issues such as compensation and government recognition. Overall, a formal assessment of individual poison centers can provide benchmarks to drive improvement of services, but further research is needed to identify and characterize country-specific needs.
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.