↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
54 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.
Article details
Title
From unwitnessed fatality to witnessed rescue: Pharmacologic intervention in sudden unexpected death in epilepsy
Published in
Epilepsia, January 2016
DOI 10.1111/epi.13236
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The mechanisms of sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) have been difficult to define, as most cases occur unwitnessed, and physiologic recordings have been obtained in only a handful of cases. However, recent data obtained from human cases and experimental studies in animal models have brought us closer to identifying potential mechanisms. Theories of SUDEP should be able to explain how a seizure starting in the forebrain can sometimes lead to changes in brainstem cardiorespiratory control mechanisms. Herein we focus on three major themes of work on the causes of SUDEP. First, evidence is reviewed identifying postictal hypoventilation as a major contributor to the cause of death. Second, data are discussed that brainstem serotonin and adenosine pathways may be involved, as well as how they may contribute. Finally, parallels are drawn between SIDS and SUDEP, and we highlight similarities pointing to the possibility of shared pathophysiology involving combined failure of respiratory and cardiovascular control mechanisms. Knowledge about the causes of SUDEP may lead to potential pharmacologic approaches for prevention. We end by describing how translation of this work may result in future applications to clinical care.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 53 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 20%
Other 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 8 15%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 39%
Neuroscience 12 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 9 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 18 December 2025.
All research outputs
#7,867,119
of 29,897,939 outputs
Outputs from Epilepsia
#2,799
of 6,985 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,002
of 412,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Epilepsia
#26
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,897,939 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,985 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 412,059 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.