↓ Skip to main content

Topiramate monotherapy for juvenile myoclonic epilepsy

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 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
Topiramate monotherapy for juvenile myoclonic epilepsy
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, December 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd010008.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Liu, Jia, Wang, Lu-Ning, Wang, Yu-Ping

Abstract

Topiramate is a newer broad-spectrum of antiepileptic drug (AED). Some studies have shown the benefits of topiramate monotherapy in the treatment of juvenile myoclonic epilepsy (JME). However, there are no current systematic reviews to determine the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate monotherapy in people with JME. To determine the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate monotherapy in the treatment of JME. We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (2 November 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL via the Cochrane Register of Studies CRSO, 2 November 2015), MEDLINE (Ovid, 2 November 2015), EMBASE (1 July 2015) and ClinicalTrials.gov (2 November 2015). In an effort to identify further published, unpublished and ongoing trials, we searched ongoing trials registers, reference lists and relevant conference proceedings, and contacted authors and pharmaceutical companies. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating topiramate monotherapy versus placebo or other AED treatment for people with JME, with the outcomes of proportion of responders or experiencing adverse events (AEs). Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, cross-checked the data for accuracy and assessed the methodological quality. We performed no meta-analyses due to the limited available data. We included three studies with 83 participants. For the efficacy, a greater proportion of participants in the topiramate group had a 50% or more reduction in primarily generalized tonic-clonic seizures (PGTCS) compared with participants in the placebo group. There were no significant differences between topiramate versus valproate in participants responding with a 50% or more reduction in myoclonic seizures or in PGTCS or seizure-free. Concerning tolerability, we ranked AEDs associated with topiramate as moderate-to-severe, while we ranked 59% of AEDs linked to valproate as severe complaints. Moreover, systemic toxicity scores were higher in the valproate group than the topiramate group. We judged the quality of the evidence from the studies to be very low. This review does not provide sufficient evidence to support topiramate for the treatment of people with JME. Based on the current limited available data, topiramate seems to be better tolerated than valproate, but there were no more benefits of efficacy in topiramate compared with valproate. In the future, well-designed, double-blind RCTs with large samples are required to test the efficacy and tolerability of topiramate in people with JME.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 4%
Unknown 24 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 28%
Researcher 4 16%
Student > Bachelor 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Librarian 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 5 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 36%
Neuroscience 3 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 8%
Computer Science 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 7 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 13 January 2017.
All research outputs
#2,568,852
of 22,836,570 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#5,184
of 12,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,487
of 390,595 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#135
of 263 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,836,570 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,320 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 390,595 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 263 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.