↓ Skip to main content

Systematic review of antiepileptic drugs’ safety and effectiveness in feline epilepsy

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
163 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
Systematic review of antiepileptic drugs’ safety and effectiveness in feline epilepsy
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, March 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12917-018-1386-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marios Charalambous, Akos Pakozdy, Sofie F. M. Bhatti, Holger A. Volk

Abstract

Understanding the efficacy and safety profile of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in feline epilepsy is a crucial consideration for managing this important brain disease. However, there is a lack of information about the treatment of feline epilepsy and therefore a systematic review was constructed to assess current evidence for the AEDs' efficacy and tolerability in cats. The methods and materials of our former systematic reviews in canine epilepsy were mostly mirrored for the current systematic review in cats. Databases of PubMed, CAB Direct and Google scholar were searched to detect peer-reviewed studies reporting efficacy and/or adverse effects of AEDs in cats. The studies were assessed with regards to their quality of evidence, i.e. study design, study population, diagnostic criteria and overall risk of bias and the outcome measures reported, i.e. prevalence and 95% confidence interval of the successful and affected population in each study and in total. Forty studies describing clinical outcomes of AEDs' efficacy and safety were included. Only two studies were classified as "blinded randomised controlled trials". The majority of the studies offered high overall risk of bias and described low feline populations with unclear diagnostic criteria and short treatment or follow-up periods. Individual AED assessments of efficacy and safety profile showed that phenobarbital might currently be considered as the first choice AED followed by levetiracetam and imepitoin. Only imepitoin's safety profile was supported by strong level of evidence. Imepitoin's efficacy as well as remaining AEDs' efficacy and safety profile were supported by weak level of evidence. This systematic review reflects an evidence-based assessment of the published data on the AEDs' efficacy and safety for feline epilepsy. Currently, phenobarbital is likely to be the first-line for feline epileptic patients followed by levetiracetam and imepitoin. It is essential that clinicians evaluate both AEDs' effectiveness and tolerability before tailoring AED to the individual patient. Further studies in feline epilepsy treatment are by far crucial in order to establish definite guidelines for AEDs' efficacy and safety.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 163 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 163 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 38 23%
Student > Master 16 10%
Researcher 13 8%
Student > Bachelor 11 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Other 33 20%
Unknown 42 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 79 48%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 3%
Neuroscience 4 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 2%
Other 7 4%
Unknown 48 29%
Attention Score in Context

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 22 June 2019.
All research outputs
#5,646,364
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#384
of 3,067 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,624
of 331,404 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#10
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,067 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 331,404 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.