ReviewJournal of family & community medicine
Prevalence of toxin exposure in regions of Saudi Arabia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of family & community medicine. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Poisoning is a growing significant concern globally. The increased use of industrial and household chemicals, together with widespread consumption of pharmaceuticals and processed foods, elevates the risk of toxic exposure worldwide. This study aimed to assess the frequency of toxic exposure by examining poisoning events in different regions of Saudi Arabia. A systematic literature review was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar to identify studies on toxins and their prevalence in Saudi Arabia from 2004 to 2024. A meta-analysis was performed using R software, and the AXIS risk of bias was evaluated. Eighteen studies met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review, and eleven of these contributed data to the meta-analysis. Pooled prevalence for synthetic drugs was: cannabis 0.40 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13-0.75), amphetamines 0.34 (95% CI: 0.05-0.85), and solvents 0.04 (95% CI: 0.02-0.07). Pooled prevalence for industrial chemicals was: chemical poisoning 0.16 (95% CI: 0.10-0.25), drug overdose 0.51 (95% CI: 0.38-0.65), and food 0.26 (95% CI: 0.22-0.29). Pooled prevalence for natural toxins was: carbon monoxide 0.76 (95% CI: 0.66-0.85), botulinum 0.42 (95% CI: 0.20-0.67), and scorpion stings 0.72 (95% CI: 0.24-0.95). The study highlights the diverse substances that cause acute poisoning in Saudi Arabia, with regional variations in toxin types and associated risks. Carbon monoxide was the most prevalent natural toxin (0.76), followed by scorpion stings (0.72). Drug overdose showed the highest prevalence of synthetic and chemical agents (0.51). Other notable toxins included botulinum (0.42), cannabis (0.40), and amphetamines (0.34). Industrial chemicals (0.16) and food-related toxins (0.26) also contributed to the issue. The findings highlight the need for public education programs on safe chemical and drug use. The future research should focus on risk factors, prevention, and the improvement of access to medical 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.