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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Teratogenicity of the newer antiepileptic drugs – the Australian experience
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Clinical Neuroscience, November 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jocn.2011.08.003 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
F.J.E. Vajda, J. Graham, A. Roten, C.M. Lander, T.J. O’Brien, M. Eadie |
| Abstract |
Data on the use in pregnancy of the new antiepileptic drugs (AED) are limited. We analysed data collected by the Australian Pregnancy Register to provide information on their relative teratogenicity. The database containing pregnancy outcomes from 1317 women with epilepsy (WWE) was examined for three widely used new AED in monotherapy in the first trimester--lamotrigine, levetiracetam and topiramate. This was compared with outcomes of pregnant WWE on monotherapy with three traditional AED, and with untreated women. The incidence of malformations associated with lamotrigine monotherapy was 12/231 (5.2%), with topiramate 1/31 (3.2%) and with levetiracetam 0/22 (0%). This compares with rates of 1/35 (2.9%) for phenytoin, 35/215 (16.3%) for valproate (VPA), 19/301 (6.3%) for carbamazepine and 6/116 (5.2%) for untreated women. There was no evidence of dose-dependent risks of foetal malformation, except with VPA monotherapy. We conclude that the new AED appear no more teratogenic than traditional drugs in monotherapy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 61 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 13 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 14% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 18 | 28% |
| Unknown | 7 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 35 | 55% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 6% |
| Psychology | 3 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 6% |
| Unknown | 9 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 14 May 2015.
All research outputs
#6,875,825
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Neuroscience
#451
of 2,431 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,453
of 245,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Neuroscience
#3
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,431 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 245,122 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.