Observational studyPLoS neglected tropical diseases2025
Epidemiology and management of wildlife contacts in an emergency department of French Guiana.
Observational study in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Organizational Challenges and Emergency Response to a Massive Bee Attack on an Isolated Island in French Guiana.Open access emergency medicine : OAEM · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextThe rapid population growth and urban expansion into the forests of French Guiana have increased human-wildlife encounters. In the Amazon, wild species are often perceived as hostile, and while serious injuries are rare, these encounters frequently lead to emergency department (ED) visits. This study aims to describe the epidemiology and management of human-wildlife contacts at the Cayenne ED. MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective observational study was conducted from January 1 to December 31, 2019, including all wildlife contact cases treated at Cayenne Hospital ED. Data on patient context, clinical status, and treatment were collected.
resultsIn 2019, 402 patients presented to the ED for wildlife-related injuries. The median age was 32 years (16-49), and the M/F ratio was 1.7. Hymenoptera (26%) were the most common cause, followed by unidentified invertebrates (20%), snakes (16%), and scorpions (12%). Most injuries involved the lower limbs (43%). Anaphylaxis occurred in 4% of cases, neurological symptoms in 8%, and digestive issues in another 8%. Biological abnormalities were noted in 15% of patients. Ninety-two cases were classified as severe or at risk of worsening, predominantly involving snakes (49%), insects (42%), and scorpions (9%). Analgesics were given to 33%, antibiotics to 27%, and 11% were hospitalized. No deaths were recorded.
conclusionIn addition to snake and scorpion incidents, this study underscores the high frequency of Hymenoptera encounters. Despite an increase in wildlife contacts, morbidity and mortality remain low.
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.