Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16822356›Full record

ReviewCurrent neurology and neuroscience reports2006

Antiepileptic drugs and neurodevelopment.

Gholam K Motamedi, Kimford J Meador

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current neurology and neuroscience reports, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Curing epilepsy: progress and future directions.Epilepsy & behavior : E&B · 2009
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Gholam K MotamediGeorgetown University Hospital, Department of Neurology, PHC 7, 3800 Reservoir Road, NW, Washington, DC 20007, USA. Motamedi@georgetown.edu
Kimford J Meador
Georgetown University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical studies have documented the teratogenic potential of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). More recent cohort studies have been trying to sort out which AEDs impose the highest risk of teratogenicity. Currently, there is evidence demonstrating an increased risk of major congenital malformations (MCMs) for valproate, phenobarbital, and polytherapy during pregnancy. Based on the current data from multiple studies, the risk for valproate is the highest. Additional studies are needed to fully delineate if differences exist for other AEDs, especially the newer AEDs. However, although MCMs are easy to recognize and have been shown to be more common after in utero exposure to AEDs, there are insufficient data regarding their long-term effects on cognition and behavior in exposed children. Although most children born to women with epilepsy are healthy, in recent years there has been increasing awareness of the long-term effects of in utero exposure to AEDs. Recent discovery of neuronal apoptosis following in utero AED exposure in animals during a period that corresponds to the third trimester and early infancy in humans raises further concerns. Prospective clinical studies seem necessary in order to better understand the long-term neurodevelopmental effects of in utero exposure to AEDs.

Indexed as

TeratogensAbnormalities, Drug-InducedAnimalsAnticonvulsantsBrainEpilepsyFemaleHumansPregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsAnticonvulsantsTeratogens

Identifiers

PMID16822356
OpenAlexW2078455686

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.