↓ Skip to main content

Neuropsychological outcomes following paediatric temporal lobe surgery for epilepsies: Evidence from a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Seizure, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
123 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
Neuropsychological outcomes following paediatric temporal lobe surgery for epilepsies: Evidence from a systematic review
Published in
Seizure, September 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.seizure.2017.09.011
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alice E. Flint, Mitch Waterman, Grace Bowmer, Gayatri Vadlamani, Paul Chumas, Matthew C.H.J. Morrall

Abstract

The systematic review aimed to assess the neuropsychological outcomes of temporal lobe resections for epilepsy in children. Additional objectives included determining whether earlier age at surgery leads to better neuropsychological outcomes; the relationships between and predictors of these outcomes. Using advanced search terms, a systematic review of electronic databases was conducted, comprising MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Global Health, Web of Science and CINAHL. Included studies reported on outcome following neurosurgical treatment for epilepsy. Specifically, studies were included if they reported neuropsychological outcomes and were concerned only with temporal lobe resection. 73 studies met inclusion criteria. For reported neuropsychological outcomes, the majority of participants remained stable after surgery; some declined and some improved. There was some evidence for increased material-specific memory deficits after temporal lobe surgery based on resection side, and more positive cognitive outcome for those with lower pre-surgical ability level. Retrieved evidence highlights the need for improvements to quality of methodology and reporting. Appropriately designed prospective multicentre trials should be conducted with adequate follow-up for long-term outcomes to be measured. Core outcome measures should be agreed between centres. This would permit higher quality evidence so that clinicians, young people and their families may make better informed decisions about whether or not to proceed with surgery and likely post-operative profile.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 123 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 18 15%
Student > Master 13 11%
Student > Postgraduate 13 11%
Researcher 13 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 7%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 38 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 28 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 15%
Neuroscience 10 8%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 2%
Other 14 11%
Unknown 46 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 22 October 2017.
All research outputs
#16,051,091
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Seizure
#1,477
of 2,691 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,195
of 325,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Seizure
#31
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,691 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 325,249 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.