| Title |
ACMT Position Statement: Alternative or Contingency Countermeasures for Acetylcholinesterase Inhibiting Agents
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Medical Toxicology, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13181-018-0658-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrew Stolbach, Vikhyat Bebarta, Michael Beuhler, Shaun Carstairs, Lewis Nelson, Michael Wahl, Paul M. Wax, Charles McKay |
| Abstract |
First responders and health care providers must prepare to provide care for patients poisoned by acetylcholinesterase (AchE) inhibitor chemical warfare agents or pesticides. However, pre-deployed medical countermeasures (MCMs) may not be sufficient due to production and delivery interruption, rapid depletion of contents during a response, expiration of MCM components, or lack of local availability of approved MCMs. To augment supplies of community-based and forward-deployed nerve agent countermeasures, the American College of Medical Toxicology (ACMT) supports several strategies: (1) The use of expired atropine, diazepam, and pralidoxime auto-injectors and vials if non-expired drugs are unavailable; and (2) Investigation, development, and identification of alternative countermeasures-commonly stocked drugs that are not approved for nerve agent poisoning but are in the same therapeutic class as approved drugs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 45 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 26 | 58% |
| Poland | 1 | 2% |
| Qatar | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 15 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 21 | 47% |
| Members of the public | 17 | 38% |
| Scientists | 7 | 16% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 3 | 18% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 18% |
| Other | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 6% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 6 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 18% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 12% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 10 | 59% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 29. 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 16 January 2019.
All research outputs
#1,267,711
of 24,140,950 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Toxicology
#83
of 692 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,575
of 330,912 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Toxicology
#3
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,140,950 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 692 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 330,912 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.