Public awareness of acetaminophen and risks of drug induced liver injury: Results of a large outpatient clinic survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acetaminophen is one of the most commonly consumed analgesics world wide. Generally perceived as a safe medication, it is the most common cause of acute liver failure in the United States with inadvertent hepatotoxicity in half of all cases. We therefore conducted a survey on the public perceptions of acetaminophen in patients attending the outpatient clinic in Vancouver, Canada. Among 928 patients who were asked, 765 completed the survey questionnaire. The majority of respondents were female (59%), Caucasian (61%), and educated beyond the secondary school level (81%). 23% reported using acetaminophen at least once a week. A significant minority were unaware of the potential liver toxicity of acetaminophen (24%), and knowledge of hepatotoxicity did not vary with education status. In terms of the medicinal composition of acetaminophen products, over half of the respondents (58%) did not know that extra strength preparations of acetaminophen contained the same drug but in a different dose. This knowledge was more prevalent among those with higher level of education (49% in graduate school educated respondents), but was still low overall. The knowledge that alcohol use with acetaminophen was more harmful was low (43%), but improved with level of education (P for trend 0.03). Among respondents who consumed alcohol regularly, 21% were consuming over 1.5 grams of acetaminophen at a time. These patients had similar harm perception to liver as patients who consumed lower doses of acetaminophen. Overall, in a large, well-educated cohort of patients, knowledge about the adverse effects of acetaminophen, the additional risks with alcohol and composition of various retailed products was suboptimal. We speculate that consumer ignorance is a significant reason why acetaminophen is a leading cause of acute liver failure.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".