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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Shortcomings in the current treatment of epilepsy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1586/ern.12.129 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Mervyn J Eadie |
| Abstract |
Contemporary drug therapy fails to control epileptic seizures in some 30% of patients, resulting in the need to employ other measures when they appear practicable. A good deal of potentially relevant statistical detail is available regarding the outcomes of the available antiepileptic therapies, but its interpretation is sometimes difficult because of uncertainty about the types of epilepsy to which it applies, and because of deficiencies in knowledge of the natural histories of the various epileptic syndromes, if untreated. The actual shortcomings in the contemporary treatment of epilepsy appear to arise not only from the limited curative capacities of the available therapies, but from a number of deficiencies in knowledge concerning the significant aspects of what should determine treatment policy and the optimal employment of antiepileptic drugs. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 120 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 27 | 22% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 13% |
| Unknown | 30 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 15% |
| Neuroscience | 14 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 11% |
| Engineering | 8 | 7% |
| Chemistry | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 27 | 22% |
| Unknown | 36 | 29% |
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 10 May 2023.
All research outputs
#4,791,680
of 23,151,189 outputs
Outputs from Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics
#374
of 1,205 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,458
of 306,670 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics
#144
of 508 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,151,189 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,205 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 306,670 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 508 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 68% of its contemporaries.