ArticleCureus2025
Medical Use of Over-the-Counter Canned Oxygen: A Review of Public Comments.
Article in Cureus, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOver-the-counter (OTC) oxygen canisters are marketed to assist with recovery after exercise, alleviate mild altitude sickness, and be included in first aid kits, all without the need for a prescription. However, they are not approved for medical use. We describe the use of OTC non-medical oxygen for medical purposes, as reported through online reviews.
methodsWe reviewed a convenience sample of the most recent 200 online public reviews of the same non-medical canned oxygen product on two different popular web-based platforms (Amazon.com pulled on May 30, 2024, and TrustPilot.com pulled on June 2, 2024) for a single, commonly purchased OTC oxygen product. Two authors independently screened the reviews, extracted information, and assessed reported use for medical purposes (yes or no) and any response. Agreement on medical use was calculated using Cohen's kappa. Medical reviews were categorized, and the frequency was reported.
resultsAfter excluding three reviews for lack of text, 48 of the 197 (24.3%) reviews were identified as being used for a medical purpose with 97% agreement between the reviewers. Medical reviews included terms such as shortness of breath/breathing (n=26), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (n=11), and asthma (n=5). Reviewers reported the use of canned oxygen as a substitute for prescribed medical oxygen and breathing difficulty to avoid going to an emergency department.
conclusionDespite warning labels advising that the product is not approved for medical use, self-reported use included potential medical indications. Clinicians should advise patients of product limitations and potential risks when OTC oxygen is used as a substitute for medical oxygen and emergency care.
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.