Evaluation of Antivenom Therapy for Middle East Scorpion Envenomations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Scorpion envenomation is a leading cause of envenomation in our region. Antivenom has been used successfully to treat the systemic manifestations of envenomations inflicted by toxic scorpions. Toxic scorpions common in our area include Leiurus quinquestriatus , Androctonus australis , and Buthus occitanus . This study describes the outcomes of children envenomated by these scorpions, and treated with SCORPIFAV, a polyvalent scorpion antivenom F(ab') 2 (equine), used since 2016 at our institution. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of all children admitted with symptoms and signs of scorpion envenomation to Soroka University Medical Center, between September 1, 2019, and December 1, 2020, who received antivenom SCORPIFAV. Our center has a protocol mandating antivenom therapy for all patients manifesting autonomic excitation, agitation, and anxiety, or more pronounced symptoms, following suspected scorpion envenomation. RESULTS: Three hundred patients were seen in the pediatric emergency department for scorpion envenomation during the study period, and 49 required antivenom (SCORPIFAV) as per departmental policy. Four of 49 developed allergic reactions during antivenom treatment: 2 manifested minor skin rashes treated with antihistamines only, and a further 2 required intramuscular adrenaline. There were no deaths in the study cohort and all patients recovered fully, with complete resolution of symptoms, signs, and laboratory features. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with antivenom exhibited rapid resolution of symptoms without severe hypersensitivity. We recommend broadened availability of antivenom at sites where it is needed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".