↓ Skip to main content

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Chelation for autism spectrum disorder (ASD)

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
4 blogs
twitter
29 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages
q&a
1 Q&A thread
video
1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
237 Mendeley
Title
Chelation for autism spectrum disorder (ASD)
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, May 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010766.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephen James, Shawn W Stevenson, Natalie Silove, Katrina Williams

Abstract

It has been suggested that the severity of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) symptoms is positively correlated with the level of circulating or stored toxic metals, and that excretion of these heavy metals, brought about by the use of pharmaceutical chelating agents, results in improved symptoms. To assess the potential benefits and adverse effects of pharmaceutical chelating agents (referred to as chelation therapy throughout this review) for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) symptoms. We searched the following databases on 6 November 2014: CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE In-Process, Embase, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and 15 other databases, including three trials registers. In addition we checked references lists and contacted experts. All randomised controlled trials of pharmaceutical chelating agents compared with placebo in individuals with ASD. Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed them for risk of bias and extracted relevant data. We did not conduct a meta-analysis, as only one study was included. We excluded nine studies because they were non-randomised trials or were withdrawn before enrolment. We included one study, which was conducted in two phases. During the first phase of the study, 77 children with ASD were randomly assigned to receive seven days of glutathione lotion or placebo lotion, followed by three days of oral dimercaptosuccinic acid (DMSA). Forty-nine children who were found to be high excreters of heavy metals during phase one continued on to phase two to receive three days of oral DMSA or placebo followed by 11 days off, with the cycle repeated up to six times. The second phase thus assessed the effectiveness of multiple doses of oral DMSA compared with placebo in children who were high excreters of heavy metals and who received a three-day course of oral DMSA. Overall, no evidence suggests that multiple rounds of oral DMSA had an effect on ASD symptoms. This review included data from only one study, which had methodological limitations. As such, no clinical trial evidence was found to suggest that pharmaceutical chelation is an effective intervention for ASD. Given prior reports of serious adverse events, such as hypocalcaemia, renal impairment and reported death, the risks of using chelation for ASD currently outweigh proven benefits. Before further trials are conducted, evidence that supports a causal link between heavy metals and autism and methods that ensure the safety of participants are needed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 237 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 235 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 38 16%
Student > Master 33 14%
Researcher 22 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 9%
Student > Postgraduate 14 6%
Other 38 16%
Unknown 71 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 55 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 31 13%
Psychology 22 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 4%
Social Sciences 8 3%
Other 36 15%
Unknown 76 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 66. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 April 2022.
All research outputs
#499,837
of 21,545,543 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#1,000
of 12,070 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,764
of 245,965 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#27
of 237 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,545,543 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,070 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 245,965 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 237 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.