Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41321431›Full record

ReviewJournal of toxicology2025

Chemical Warfare Through the Ages: A Systematic Review From Antiquity to the Present.

Damian Alexander Honeyman, David James Heslop, Samsung Lim, Chandini Raina MacIntyre

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of 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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Damian Alexander HoneymanBiosecurity Research Program, The Kirby Institute, The University of New South Wales, Kensington, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4339-1801
David James HeslopSchool of Population Health, The University of New South Wales, Kensington, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1978-770X
Samsung LimBiosecurity Research Program, The Kirby Institute, The University of New South Wales, Kensington, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9838-8960
Chandini Raina MacIntyreBiosecurity Research Program, The Kirby Institute, The University of New South Wales, Kensington, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3060-0555

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chemical warfare means the use of chemical agents that have direct toxic effects on animals, plants and humans, as weapons. The first documented use of a chemical agent for warfare purposes occurred in ancient times around 10,000 BCE in South Africa when weapons were dipped in chemicals and then used to attack and defend from enemies. However, much of the evidence lacks detail to provide thorough accounts of such events. Nevertheless, we aimed to systematically gather the most comprehensive account of all publicly known incidents involving chemical weapons throughout history. We identified 121 instances of chemical weapon use between 10,000 BCE and October 2023 spanning 49 countries and causing at minimum 2,110,360 injuries and 2,930,769 deaths. Across the 121 incidents, at least 165 chemical agents were used. Of the known chemical agents, the top three were sulphur mustard (

Indexed as

chemical agentschemical warfarechemical weaponsweapons of mass destruction history

Identifiers

PMID41321431
PMCPMC12660622

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.