Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22702637›Full record

ReviewDrug safety2012

Safety and tolerability of antiepileptic drug treatment in children with epilepsy.

Renzo Guerrini, Gaetano Zaccara, Giancarlo la Marca, Anna Rosati

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Drug safety, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. The effect of erythromycin and clarithromycin versus azithromycin on serum valproate concentration.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2022
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Antiepileptic drug use in Italian children over a decade.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2017
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Renzo GuerriniPaediatric Neurology Unit and Laboratories, Childrens Hospital A. Meyer, University of Florence, Italy. r.guerrini@meyer.it
Gaetano Zaccara
Giancarlo la Marca
Anna Rosati
Meyer Children's Hospital · ITNuovo Ospedale San Giovanni di Dio · ITUniversity of Florence · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of treating epilepsy is to control or at least decrease seizures without producing unacceptable adverse effects that impair quality of life. Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) have been considered amongst the drugs most frequently associated with fatal suspected adverse drug reactions. Physicians must therefore be as familiar with safety and tolerability data of AEDs as they are with the expected therapeutic effects. AEDs may cause dose-related adverse effects (i.e. drowsiness, fatigue, dizziness, blurry vision and incoordination) that, in most cases, may be obviated by lowering the dosage, reducing the number of drugs or switching to a better tolerated AED. AEDs also have the potential of precipitating idiosyncratic adverse effects (i.e. serious cutaneous, haematological and hepatic events), which are more common in children and usually require withdrawal of the AED. Although occurrence of idiosyncratic adverse effects can only rarely be predicted or prevented, there are known risk factors that can help in identifying patients at high risk. Occurrence of an idiosyncratic event in a close relative, a concomitant autoimmune disease, co-treatment with specific drugs, history of a previous allergic drug reaction, starting treatment with high doses and rapid titration have all been associated with a higher risk of idiosyncratic adverse effects. New AEDs have been developed in the last two decades with the aim of improving the benefit-risk balance of AED therapy. Available evidence suggests that the newer AEDs are no more effective but may be somewhat better tolerated than older molecules. We performed a literature review with the aim of evaluating safety and tolerability of second- and third-generation AEDs in children. A PubMed search was conducted with the purpose of identifying English-language studies published between 1 January 1989 and 1 January 2011 that reported any adverse event having occurred in children with epilepsy in whom second- and third-generation AEDs were administered.

Indexed as

Age FactorsAnticonvulsantsChildChild, PreschoolDose-Response Relationship, DrugEpilepsyHumansInfantRisk FactorsAnticonvulsants

Identifiers

PMID22702637
OpenAlexW2113425017

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.