↓ Skip to main content

Serious adverse effects of unconventional therapies for children and adolescents: a systematic review of recent evidence

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Pediatrics, December 2002
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
132 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
Title
Serious adverse effects of unconventional therapies for children and adolescents: a systematic review of recent evidence
Published in
European Journal of Pediatrics, December 2002
DOI 10.1007/s00431-002-1113-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Edzard Ernst

Abstract

Unconventional therapies have become popular in paediatric and adolescent populations. It is therefore important to define their risks. The aim of this systematic review was to summarise the recent evidence. Computerised literature searches were carried out in five databases to identify all recent reports of adverse events associated with unconventional therapies in children. The reports were summarised in narrative and tabular form. The results show that numerous case reports and several case series have been published since 1990. Investigations of a more systematic nature are, however, rare. Most of the adverse events were associated with herbal medications. Inadequately regulated herbal medicines may contain toxic plant material, be contaminated with heavy metals, or be adulterated with synthetic drugs. The adverse events included bradycardia, brain damage, cardiogenic shock, diabetic coma, encephalopathy, heart rupture, intravascular haemolysis, liver failure, respiratory failure, toxic hepatitis and death. A high degree of uncertainty regarding a causal relationship between therapy and adverse event was frequently noted. The size of the problem and its importance relative to the well-documented risks of conventional treatments are presently unknown. Several unconventional therapies may constitute a risk to the health of children and adolescents. At present, it is impossible to provide reliable incidence figures. It seems important to be vigilant and investigate this area more systematically.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 2 2%
Finland 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 78 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 13%
Other 7 8%
Student > Master 7 8%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Other 18 22%
Unknown 18 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 41%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Other 15 18%
Unknown 19 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 March 2024.
All research outputs
#1,104,512
of 25,611,630 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Pediatrics
#83
of 4,452 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,672
of 136,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Pediatrics
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,611,630 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,452 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 136,617 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.