↓ Skip to main content

Assessment of methods used to determine the safety of the topical insect repellent N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide (DEET)

Overview of attention for article published in Parasites & Vectors, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#1 of 6,071)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
110 news outlets
blogs
7 blogs
policy
1 policy source
twitter
20 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
video
2 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
158 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Assessment of methods used to determine the safety of the topical insect repellent N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide (DEET)
Published in
Parasites & Vectors, June 2014
DOI 10.1186/1756-3305-7-173
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vanessa Chen-Hussey, Ron Behrens, James G Logan

Abstract

N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide (DEET) has been registered for commercial use as an insect repellent for over five decades, and is used widely across the world. Concerns over the safety of DEET first emerged during the 1980s after reports of encephalopathy following DEET exposure, particularly in children. However, the role of DEET in either the illness or deaths was and remains purely speculative. In response to these cases a number of reviews and investigations of DEET safety were carried out. Here we examine the methods used and information available to determine the safety of DEET in humans. Animal testing, observational studies and intervention trials have found no evidence of severe adverse events associated with recommended DEET use. Minor adverse effects noted in animal trials were associated with very large doses and were not replicated between different test species. The safety surveillance from extensive humans use reveals no association with severe adverse events. This review compares the toxicity assessment using three different models to define the risk assessment and safety threshold for DEET use in humans and discusses the clinical consequences of the thresholds derived from the models.The theoretical risks associated with wearing an insect repellent should be weighed against the reduction or prevention of the risk of fatal or debilitating diseases including malaria, dengue, yellow fever and filariasis. With over 48 million European residents travelling to regions where vector borne diseases are a threat in 2009, restricting the concentration of DEET containing repellents to 15% or less, as modelled in the 2010 EU directive, is likely to result in extensive sub-therapeutic activity where repellents are infrequently applied. Future European travellers, as a consequence of inadequate personal protection, could potentially be at increased risk of vector borne diseases. Risk assessments of repellents should take these factors into account when setting safe limits.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
Japan 1 <1%
Ghana 1 <1%
Unknown 154 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 27 17%
Researcher 26 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 8%
Student > Postgraduate 11 7%
Student > Master 11 7%
Other 27 17%
Unknown 44 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 23 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 13 8%
Chemistry 8 5%
Environmental Science 7 4%
Other 29 18%
Unknown 49 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 930. 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 08 March 2024.
All research outputs
#18,448
of 25,845,749 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#1
of 6,071 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#96
of 244,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#1
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,845,749 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,071 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 244,216 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.