Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40402047›Full record

ArticleClinical practice and cases in emergency medicine2025

Case Report: 2-PAM or not 2-PAM.

Madelyn Huttner, Kahra Nix, Caitlyn Blair, Matthew Eisenstat

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical practice and cases in emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Madelyn HuttnerUniversity of Louisville, School of Medicine Department of Emergency Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky.
Kahra NixUniversity of Louisville, School of Medicine Department of Emergency Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky.
Caitlyn BlairUniversity of Louisville, School of Medicine Department of Emergency Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky.
Matthew EisenstatUniversity of Louisville, School of Medicine Department of Emergency Medicine, Louisville, Kentucky.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionOrganophosphates (OP) are used as pest control agents worldwide and have been seen in accidental and intentional poisonings. CASE REPORT: A patient presented after intentional ingestion of the OP Orthene (50% acephate). Due to copious secretions, the patient was intubated and given atropine by the paramedic before transport. In the emergency department he displayed both muscarinic and nicotinic effects from OP ingestion. The patient was given multiple doses of atropine and a pralidoxime bolus. He was extubated and transferred to psychiatry two days later.

conclusionAcute OP exposure is a rare but complex presentation in the United States. In the United States there are bans on several organophosphate varieties, which have reduced the number and severity of OP toxicities. Acephate is generally considered a safer OP by United States regulators and the World Health Organization. In this case report, we describe an OP exposure with marked symptoms requiring intubation and successful treatment with atropine and pralidoxime. We also discuss the role of oximes in acephate toxicity.

Identifiers

PMID40402047
PMCPMC12097250

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.