Evaluating the Characteristics and Outcomes of Acute Pharmaceutical Exposure in Children: 5-Year Retrospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Acute pharmaceutical exposure in children can lead to severe health outcomes and contribute to the inefficient use of medical resources. Objective: This study aimed to investigate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of children with acute pharmaceutical exposure to guide the development of preventive strategies and educational initiatives. Methods: We analyzed real-world data from electronic medical records of children admitted to the emergency department of a pediatric hospital for acute pharmaceutical exposure between January 2019 and December 2023. Clinical data, including laboratory test results, interventions, and outcomes, were collected. We compared different exposure events and conducted logistic regression analysis to identify risk factors for hospitalization. Results: A total of 653 children were included in the study. The most common drugs involved in exposure were vitamins (149/653, 22.8%), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (92/653, 14.1%), and psychiatric drugs (74/653, 11.3%). In total, 74.3% (469/631) of patients with complete clinical manifestation data showed no symptoms after exposure, and 68.1% (445/653) of patients did not require specific therapy. Toxicology screening was performed for 11% (72/653) of the children, and 69.4% (50/72) of these tests were positive. Independent risk factors for hospitalization included multisystem involvement (odds ratio [OR] 4.575, 95% CI 1.709-12.251, P=.002), psychiatric drugs (OR 6.280, 95% CI 2.189-18.020, P=.001), and intentional poisoning (OR 12.892, 95% CI 2.222-74.796, P=.004). Conclusions: Children with acute pharmaceutical exposure exhibit diverse clinical characteristics and outcomes, with most requiring no specific treatment. However, immediate toxicology screening and clinical intervention are essential for those exhibiting rapidly developing or multisystem symptoms, as well as those with intentional exposure or exposure to known highly toxic substances. Future pediatric health care policies should emphasize safe storage practices and public education on the prevention of pharmaceutical exposure.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".