| Title |
Treatment in canine epilepsy – a systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Veterinary Research, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12917-014-0257-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marios Charalambous, David Brodbelt, Holger A Volk |
| Abstract |
Various antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are used for the management of canine idiopathic epilepsy (IE). Information on their clinical efficacy remains limited. A systematic review was designed to evaluate existing evidence for the effectiveness of AEDs for presumptive canine IE. Electronic searches of PubMed and CAB Direct were carried out without date or language restrictions. Conference proceedings were also searched. Peer-reviewed full-length studies describing objectively the efficacy of AEDs in dogs with IE were included. Studies were allocated in two groups, i.e. blinded randomized clinical trials (bRCTs), non-blinded randomized clinical trials (nbRCTs) and non-randomized clinical trials (NRCTs) (group A) and uncontrolled clinical trials (UCTs) and case series (group B). Individual studies were evaluated based on the quality of evidence (study design, study group sizes, subject enrolment quality and overall risk of bias) and the outcome measures reported (in particular the proportion of dogs with ≥ 50% reduction in seizure frequency). |
Twitter Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 44 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 9 | 20% |
| United States | 4 | 9% |
| Cyprus | 3 | 7% |
| Russia | 2 | 5% |
| Spain | 2 | 5% |
| Canada | 2 | 5% |
| Brazil | 2 | 5% |
| Belgium | 2 | 5% |
| Greece | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 14% |
| Unknown | 11 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 38 | 86% |
| Scientists | 3 | 7% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 5% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 2% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 246 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 245 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 29 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 29 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 23 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 22 | 9% |
| Other | 53 | 22% |
| Unknown | 66 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 100 | 41% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 34 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 7 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 2% |
| Other | 16 | 7% |
| Unknown | 67 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 57. 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
#696,891
of 24,242,692 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#29
of 3,140 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,739
of 265,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#2
of 57 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 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% 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 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 265,123 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 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 98% of its contemporaries.