ArticlePLOS global public health2026
A narrative systematic review of snakebite risk factors in Kenya, incorporating grey and academic literature.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Snakebite is a neglected tropical disease, the drivers of which remain poorly understood and controlled in many countries. Incorporating grey literature has been recommended by previous academic publications on snakebite, due to the limited studies available globally, to provide a more accurate understanding of burden. In this review we aimed to identify and better understand risk factors that are associated with increased risk of snakebite, specifically across Kenya, using both grey and academic literature sources. We appraised academic studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool, while grey literature was assessed using the Authority, Accuracy, Coverage, Date and Significance guidelines. This systematic review synthesised evidence from 16 eligible peer-reviewed studies and 4 grey literature sources (1994-2025) examining determinants of snakebite risk and outcomes across Kenya. Given the limited number of eligible studies and heterogeneity of study types we conducted a thematic narrative synthesis. A total of 25 variables clustered into four domains were assessed, spanning human demographic factors, and environmental exposures. This study concurred with established literature on factors such as rurality, poverty and farming increasing snakebite risk, but also highlights discrepancies with global data. Several studies reported no seasonal variation or more bites in the dry season; bites were reported to occur equally in the day and the night in some studies; and no significant gender difference was observed in several reports. Overall findings converged on a consistent picture, snakebite envenoming in Kenya is concentrated among poorer, rural populations, and is more consistently linked to livelihoods and housing conditions, than seasonality or temporality. Actual burden and species responsible for bites remain poorly understood.
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.