↓ Skip to main content

Should We Be Using the Poisoning Severity Score?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Toxicology, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
Title
Should We Be Using the Poisoning Severity Score?
Published in
Journal of Medical Toxicology, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/s13181-017-0609-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Evan S. Schwarz, Kathryn T. Kopec, Timothy J. Wiegand, Paul M. Wax, Jeffrey Brent

Abstract

Despite the existence of a number of severity-of-illness classifications for other areas of medicine, toxicology research lacks a well-accepted method for assessing the severity of poisoning. The Poisoning Severity Score (PSS) was developed in the 1990s in Europe as a scoring system for poisonings reported to a poison center in order to describe a patient's most severe symptomatology. We reviewed the literature to describe how the PSS is utilized and describe its limitations. We searched the medical literature in all languages using PUBMED, EMBASE, and SCOPUS from inception through August 2013 using predefined search terms. Out of 204 eligible publications, 40 met our criteria for inclusion in this review. There has been a paucity of published studies from North America that used the PSS. In some cases,  the PSS was misapplied or modified from standard scoring, making a bottom line appraisal of the validity or reliability of the original version of the instrument challenging. The PSS has several subjective criteria, is time consuming to score, and is likely to be of little use with some types of poisonings, limiting its clinical utility. The PSS was developed as a tool to document encounters with poisoned patients. However, it is used infrequently and, when applied, has been misused or modified from its original form. In its current form, it has limited clinical utility and likely cannot be broadly applied to many exposures due to their unique clinical circumstances. With better global collaboration among medical toxicologists, it is possible that a modified score could be developed for use clinically or as a research instrument.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 21%
Other 5 13%
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Master 4 11%
Lecturer 3 8%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 8 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 42%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 9 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 10 July 2020.
All research outputs
#6,473,633
of 22,962,258 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Toxicology
#383
of 671 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,200
of 307,825 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Toxicology
#7
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,962,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 671 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.6. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 307,825 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.