Snake Bites in The Arabian Peninsula: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTIONThe aim of this study is to provide a comprehensive review of snake bites in the Arabian Peninsula. METHODS A scoping review was conducted from October to December 2022, and included sources from PubMed, Ovid, the Cochrane Database, reference lists of relevant articles, and grey literature sources such as ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization’s International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. The keywords used were “Arabian Peninsula”, “Saudi Arabia”, “Qatar”, “Kuwait”, “Oman”, “United Arab Emirates”, “Bahrain”, “Yemen”, “snake venom”, “snake bite”, and “envenomation”. The inclusion criteria for selecting studies were those that explored snake bites in various regions of the Arabian Peninsula. RESULTS 28 studies were included, with a total of 16,602 snake bite cases. In 78.57% of cases, the initial presentation was a local injury. Haematological manifestations were seen in several of the reported cases, while some cases showed neurological symptoms and cardiac manifestation. Leucocytosis, thrombocytopenia/thrombocytosis, and acute kidney injury and proteinuria were also observed. The administered dose of antivenom varied, and post-antivenom complications were seen in less than one third of the reported cases. CONCLUSIONThe current body of literature does not provide a concise management plan for snake bite in the Arabian Peninsula. We provide a proposed plan for treating and monitoring such cases.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".