| Titre : | Botulinum toxin as a biological weapon : Medical and public health management. (2001) |
| Auteurs : | Stephen-S ARNON ; Michael-S ASCHER ; John-G BARTLETT ; Edward EITZEN ; Anne-D FINE ; Jerome HAUER ; Donald-A HENDERSON ; Thomas-V INGLESBY ; Marcelle LAYTON ; Scott LILLIBRIDGE ; Tara O'TOOLE ; Michael-T OSTERHOLM ; Gerald PARKER ; Trish-M PERL ; Philip-K RUSSELL ; Robert SCHECHTER ; David-L SWERDLOW ; Kevin TONAT ; Center for Civilian Biodefense Studies. Johns Hopkins University Schools of Medicine Public Health. Baltimore. MD. USA ; Infant Botulism Treatment and Prevention Program. California Department of Health Services. Berkeley. USA ; Us Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases. Ft Detrick. MD. USA ; Working Group on Civilian Biodefense. INC |
| Type de document : | Article |
| Dans : | JAMA - Journal of the american medical association (vol. 285, n° 8, 2001) |
| Pagination : | 1059-1070 |
| Langues: | Anglais |
| Mots-clés : | Enzyme ; Médecine catastrophe ; Thérapeutique ; Intoxication ; Recommandation ; Diagnostic ; Homme |
| Résumé : | [BDSP. Notice produite par INIST 3GK2R0xU. Diffusion soumise à autorisation]. Objective The Working Group on Civilian Biodefense has developed consensus-based recommendations for measures to be taken by medical and public health professionals if botulinum toxin is used as a biological weapon against a civilian population. Participants The working group included 23 representatives from academic, government, and private institutions with expertise in public health, emergency management, and clinical medicine. Evidence The primary authors (S.S.A. and R.S.) searched OLDMEDLINE and MEDLINE (1960-March 1999) and their professional collections for literature concerning use of botulinum toxin as a bioweapon. The literature was reviewed, and opinions were sought from the working group and other experts on diagnosis and management of botulism. Additional MEDLINE searches were conducted through April 2000 during the review and revisions of the consensus statement. Consensus Process The first draft of the working group's consensus statement was a synthesis of information obtained in the formal evidence-gathering process. The working group convened to review the first draft in May 1999. Working group members reviewed subsequent drafts and suggested additional revisions. The final statement incorporates all relevant evidence obtained in the literature search in conjunction with final consensus recommendations supported by all working group members. (...) |
Service Documentation EHESP
Me connecter
PORTAIL DOCUMENTAIRE
École des hautes études en santé publique
Catalogue
Multi-bases
Accueil
Sélection de la langue
Adresse
Service Documentation EHESPBibliothèque Rennes Avenue du Professeur Léon Bernard – CS 74312 – 35043 Rennes Cedex Bibliothèque MSSH Paris 20 avenue George Sand - 93210 La Plaine Saint-Denis
France
Bibliothèque Rennes : 02 99 02 29 50 Bibliothèque MSSH Paris : 02 99 02 24 50
contact