↓ Skip to main content

International veterinary epilepsy task force consensus proposal: outcome of therapeutic interventions in canine and feline epilepsy

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, 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 (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
69 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
262 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
International veterinary epilepsy task force consensus proposal: outcome of therapeutic interventions in canine and feline epilepsy
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12917-015-0465-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Heidrun Potschka, Andrea Fischer, Wolfgang Löscher, Ned Patterson, Sofie Bhatti, Mette Berendt, Luisa De Risio, Robyn Farquhar, Sam Long, Paul Mandigers, Kaspar Matiasek, Karen Muñana, Akos Pakozdy, Jacques Penderis, Simon Platt, Michael Podell, Clare Rusbridge, Veronika Stein, Andrea Tipold, Holger A Volk

Abstract

Common criteria for the diagnosis of drug resistance and the assessment of outcome are needed urgently as a prerequisite for standardized evaluation and reporting of individual therapeutic responses in canine epilepsy. Thus, we provide a proposal for the definition of drug resistance and partial therapeutic success in canine patients with epilepsy. This consensus statement also suggests a list of factors and aspects of outcome, which should be considered in addition to the impact on seizures. Moreover, these expert recommendations discuss criteria which determine the validity and informative value of a therapeutic trial in an individual patient and also suggest the application of individual outcome criteria. Agreement on common guidelines does not only render a basis for future optimization of individual patient management, but is also a presupposition for the design and implementation of clinical studies with highly standardized inclusion and exclusion criteria. Respective standardization will improve the comparability of findings from different studies and renders an improved basis for multicenter studies. Therefore, this proposal provides an in-depth discussion of the implications of outcome criteria for clinical studies. In particular ethical aspects and the different options for study design and application of individual patient-centered outcome criteria are considered.

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 262 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 261 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 42 16%
Student > Bachelor 31 12%
Researcher 27 10%
Student > Master 24 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 24 9%
Other 57 22%
Unknown 57 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 139 53%
Medicine and Dentistry 26 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 4%
Neuroscience 5 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 1%
Other 15 6%
Unknown 64 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 10 August 2023.
All research outputs
#2,059,241
of 24,242,692 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#126
of 3,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,783
of 272,676 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#5
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,242,692 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,140 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 272,676 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.