Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39766460›Full record

ReviewBrain sciences2024

Multiple Chemical Sensitivity: A Clinical Perspective.

Louis Jacques

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. 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

1 author.

Louis JacquesClinic of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Montreal University Hospital Center, Montreal, QC H2X 0C1, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe etiology of multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) is still debated, which is an obstacle to assessing treatment options. An analysis of the scientific literature combined with the clinical experience can suggest some avenues.

methodsThe etiology of MCS and its underlying mechanisms were reviewed from the scientific literature to identify the main factors contributing to its development. The results of the studies involving biomarkers and cerebral imaging techniques on MCS subjects were compared with those performed on subjects having the comorbidities of MCS. From the scientific literature and the experience in a clinical setting in occupational and environmental medicine, distinct types of MCS were looked for, with the application of the underlying mechanisms. The potential effectiveness of available treatments was also reviewed.

resultsAmong many factors, unresolved emotional traumas causing chronic and acute stress reactions play an important role in the development of MCS and can be the basis for effective treatment. We identified three types of clinical presentations, called the accidental type, following a toxic exposure causing an associated emotional trauma, the associative type, following a repeated innocuous exposure in a threatening context, and the developmental type, following a traumatic childhood/adolescence causing hypervigilance and chronic stress/trauma-related disorders. We presented real cases to illustrate these types and the mechanisms behind their development, as well as effective resolution.

conclusionsMCS and its comorbidities could be treated effectively when the underlying emotional trauma(s) are targeted using trauma-focused psychotherapy and other therapies. Diagnostic criteria, principles of treatment and prevention, and avenues for research were derived from this analysis.

Indexed as

anxietyautonomous nervous systemcomorbiditiesemotional traumasmultiple chemical sensitivitypsychotherapystress response

Identifiers

PMID39766460
PMCPMC11674335

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.