↓ Skip to main content

PRISM II: an open-label study to assess effectiveness of dextromethorphan/quinidine for pseudobulbar affect in patients with dementia, stroke or traumatic brain injury

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neurology, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#2 of 1,772)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
70 news outlets
twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
121 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
PRISM II: an open-label study to assess effectiveness of dextromethorphan/quinidine for pseudobulbar affect in patients with dementia, stroke or traumatic brain injury
Published in
BMC Neurology, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12883-016-0609-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Flora M. Hammond, David N. Alexander, Andrew J. Cutler, Stephen D’Amico, Rachelle S. Doody, William Sauve, Richard D. Zorowitz, Charles S. Davis, Paul Shin, Fred Ledon, Charles Yonan, Andrea E. Formella, Joao Siffert

Abstract

Phase 3 trials supporting dextromethorphan/quinidine (DM/Q) use as a treatment for pseudobulbar affect (PBA) were conducted in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) or multiple sclerosis (MS). The PRISM II study provides additional DM/Q experience with PBA secondary to dementia, stroke, or traumatic brain injury (TBI). Participants in this open-label, multicenter, 90-day trial received DM/Q 20/10 mg twice daily. The primary outcome was the Center for Neurologic Study-Lability Scale (CNS-LS), assessing change in PBA episode frequency and severity. The CNS-LS final visit score was compared to baseline (primary analysis) and to the response in a previously conducted placebo-controlled trial with DM/Q in patients with ALS or MS. Secondary outcomes included change in PBA episode count and Clinical Global Impression of Change with respect to PBA as rated by a clinician (CGI-C) and by the patient or caregiver (PGI-C). The study enrolled 367 participants with PBA secondary to dementia, stroke, or TBI. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) CNS-LS score improved significantly from 20.4 (4.4) at baseline to 12.8 (5.0) at Day 90/Final Visit (change, -7.7 [6.1]; P < .001, 95 % CI: -8.4, -7.0). This magnitude of improvement was consistent with DM/Q improvement in the earlier phase-3, placebo-controlled trial (mean [95 % CI] change from baseline, -8.2 [-9.4, -7.0]) and numerically exceeds the improvement seen with placebo in that study (-5.7 [-6.8, -4.7]). Reduction in PBA episode count was 72.3 % at Day 90/Final Visit compared with baseline (P < .001). Scores on CGI-C and PGI-C showed that 76.6 and 72.4 % of participants, respectively, were "much" or "very much" improved with respect to PBA. The most frequently occurring adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (5.4 %), headache (4.1 %), urinary tract infection (2.7 %), and dizziness (2.5 %); 9.8 % had AEs that led to discontinuation. Serious AEs were reported in 6.3 %; however, none were considered treatment related. DM/Q was shown to be an effective and well-tolerated treatment for PBA secondary to dementia, stroke, or TBI. The magnitude of PBA improvement was similar to that reported in patients with PBA secondary to ALS or MS, and the adverse event profile was consistent with the known safety profile of DM/Q. Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01799941, registered on 25 February 2013.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 121 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 119 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 16%
Student > Master 17 14%
Researcher 17 14%
Other 15 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 7%
Other 18 15%
Unknown 26 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 21%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 15%
Psychology 13 11%
Neuroscience 11 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 4%
Other 14 12%
Unknown 34 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 546. 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 August 2019.
All research outputs
#19,069
of 15,670,680 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#2
of 1,772 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#719
of 268,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,670,680 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,772 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 268,240 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them