↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Identification of common predictors of surgical outcomes for epilepsy surgery

Overview of attention for article published in Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
Title
Identification of common predictors of surgical outcomes for epilepsy surgery
Published in
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, November 2013
DOI 10.2147/ndt.s53802
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jing Zhang, Weifang Liu, Hui Chen, Hong Xia, Zhen Zhou, Shanshan Mei, Qingzhu Liu, Yunlin Li

Abstract

Although epilepsy surgery is an effective treatment for patients with drug-resistant epilepsy, surgical outcomes vary across patient groups and studies. Identification of reliable prognostic factors for surgical outcome is important for outcome research. In this study, recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses on prediction of seizure outcome have been analyzed, and common predictors of seizure outcome or unrelated factors for temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE), lesional extratemporal lobe epilepsy (ETLE), and tuberous sclerosis complex have been identified. Clinical factors such as lesional epilepsy, abnormal magnetic resonance imaging, partial seizures, and complete resection were found to be common positive predictors, and factors such as nonlesional epilepsy, poorly defined and localized epileptic focus, generalized seizures, and incomplete resection are common negative predictors, while factors such as age at surgery and side of surgery are unrelated to seizure outcome for TLE and lesional ETLE. In addition, diagnostic neuroimaging and resection are among the most important predictors of seizure outcome. However, common predictors of seizure outcome could not be identified in nonlesional ETLE because no predictors were found to be significant in adult patients (by meta-analysis), and outcome prediction is difficult in this case. Meta-analysis of other outcomes, such as neuropsychologic outcomes, is rare due to lack of evaluation standards. Further studies on identification of reliable predictors of surgical outcomes are needed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Spain 1 2%
Netherlands 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 57 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 19%
Student > Master 11 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Student > Postgraduate 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 11 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 44%
Neuroscience 8 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Psychology 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 14 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 05 November 2013.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#1,901
of 3,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,755
of 226,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#29
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,132 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 226,646 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.