↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on levetiracetam in the treatment of pediatric patients with epilepsy

Overview of attention for article published in Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
6 Mendeley
Title
A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on levetiracetam in the treatment of pediatric patients with epilepsy
Published in
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment, March 2018
DOI 10.2147/ndt.s151413
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lanlan Zhang, Chengzhong Wang, Wei Li

Abstract

To evaluate clinical efficacy, safety, and tolerability of levetiracetam as mono- or adjunctive therapy in the treatment of children and adolescents with epilepsy. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials published from January 2007 to December 2016 in the databases Web of Science, Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and PubMed, Bing, Baidu, Google Scholar, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang Data. All of the studies eligible were compared for the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of levetiracetam with other antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in epilepsy. Thirteen randomized controlled trials on a total of 1,013 patients met the inclusion criteria in present study. Compared with other AEDs (oxcarbazepine, valproate, sulthiame, carbamazepine, and placebo), we found that levetiracetam had a comparable seizure-free rate (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.03-1.31; P=0.30). Regarding seizure-frequency reduction ≥50% from baseline, levetiracetam also seemed equivalent to other AEDs (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.01-1.16; P=0.35). In spite of patients treated with levetiracetam having a lower incidence of side effects compared with patients treated with other AEDs (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.77-1.06), the difference between them was minute and not statistically significant (P=0.22). Based on this meta-analysis, it seemed that levetiracetam had comparable effects concerning efficacy, tolerability, and adverse events. Nevertheless, 13 studies were insufficient to draw a conclusion that levetiracetam is effective as mono- and adjunctive therapy for all types of epilepsy syndromes and seizures. Larger-sample and more well-designed trials are needed to justify the widespread use of levetiracetam in the treatment of children and adolescents.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 2 33%
Unknown 4 67%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 2 33%
Unknown 4 67%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 16 March 2018.
All research outputs
#7,635,182
of 12,662,564 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#1,223
of 2,143 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,125
of 274,201 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment
#36
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,662,564 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,143 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 274,201 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.