↓ Skip to main content

Pharmacological treatments for preventing epilepsy following traumatic head injury

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 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 (87th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
22 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
74 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
281 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
Pharmacological treatments for preventing epilepsy following traumatic head injury
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, August 2015
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009900.pub2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kara Thompson, Bernhard Pohlmann-Eden, Leslie A Campbell, Hannah Abel

Abstract

Head injury is a common event and can cause a spectrum of motor and cognition disabilities. A frequent complication is seizures. Antiepileptic drugs (AED) such as phenytoin are often used in clinical practice with the hopes of preventing post-traumatic epilepsy. Whether immediate medical intervention following head trauma with either AEDs or neuroprotective drugs can alter the process of epileptogenesis and lead to a more favorable outcome is currently unknown. This review attempted to address the effectiveness of these treatment interventions. This review updates and expands on the earlier Cochrane review. To compare the efficacy of antiepileptic drugs and neuroprotective agents with placebo, usual care or other pharmacologic agents for the prevention of post-traumatic epilepsy in people diagnosed with any severity of traumatic brain injury. We searched The Cochrane Epilepsy Group's specialized register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) in January 2015. We searched EMBASE, Biological Abstracts and National Research Register in September 2014 and SCOPUS in December 2013. The Cochrane Epilepsy Group performed handsearches of relevant journals. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that include AEDs or neuroprotective agents compared with placebo, another pharmacologic agent or a usual care group. The outcomes measured included a seizure occurring within one week of trauma (early seizure), seizure occurring later than one week post-trauma (late seizure), mortality and any adverse events. Two review authors independently assessed study quality and extracted the data. We calculated risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each outcome. We used random-effects models in the meta-analyses and performed pre-defined subgroup and sensitivity analyses. This review included 10 RCTs (reported in 12 articles) consisting of 2326 participants The methodological quality of the studies varied. The type of intervention was separated into three categories; AED versus placebo or standard care, alternative neuroprotective agent versus placebo or standard care and AED versus other AED. Treatment with an AED (phenytoin or carbamazepine) decreased the risk of early seizure compared with placebo or standard care (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.73; very low quality evidence). There was no evidence of a difference in the risk of late seizure occurrence between AEDs and placebo or standard care (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.46; very low quality evidence). There was no evidence of a significant difference in all-cause mortality between AEDs and placebo or standard care (RR 1.08 95% CI 0.79 to 1.46,very low quality of evidence). Only one study looked at other potentially neuroprotective agents (magnesium sulfate) compared with placebo. The risk ratios were: late seizure 1.07 (95% CI 0.53 to 2.17) and all-cause mortality 1.20 (95% CI 0.80 to 1.81). The risk ratio for occurrence of early seizure was not estimable.Two studies looked at comparison of two AEDs (levetiracetam, valproate) with phenytoin used as the main comparator in each study. The risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.53 (95% CI 0.30 to 0.94). There was no evidence of treatment benefit of phenytoin compared with another AED for early seizures (RR 0.66, 95% 0.20 to 2.12) or late seizures(RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.30).Only two studies reported adverse events. The RR of any adverse event with AED compared with placebo was 1.65 (95% CI 0.73 to 3.66; low quality evidence). There were insufficient data on adverse events in the other treatment comparisons. This review found low-quality evidence that early treatment with an AED compared with placebo or standard care reduced the risk of early post-traumatic seizures. There was no evidence to support a reduction in the risk of late seizures or mortality. There was insufficient evidence to make any conclusions regarding the effectiveness or safety of other neuroprotective agents compared with placebo or for the comparison of phenytoin, a traditional AED, with another AED.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 281 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Unknown 278 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 43 15%
Student > Master 36 13%
Researcher 32 11%
Student > Postgraduate 25 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 8%
Other 66 23%
Unknown 57 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 114 41%
Psychology 16 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 5%
Neuroscience 12 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 10 4%
Other 43 15%
Unknown 71 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 28 February 2019.
All research outputs
#2,168,849
of 20,975,194 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,770
of 12,060 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,066
of 248,867 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#122
of 258 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 20,975,194 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,060 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 28.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 248,867 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 258 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 53% of its contemporaries.