Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23582711›Full record

ArticleNeurological research2013

Survey of prophylactic antiseizure drug use for non-traumatic intracerebral hemorrhage.

Matthew B Jensen, Ahsan Sattar, Khalid Al Sherbini

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurological research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Prophylactic Use of Antiepileptic Drugs in Patients with Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage.Journal of stroke and cerebrovascular diseases : the official journal of National Stroke Association · 2016
    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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Matthew B JensenUniversity of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA.
Ahsan Sattar
Khalid Al Sherbini
University of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

Institutional Clinical and Translational Science AwardUL1TR000427 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI DREZNER, MARC KENNETH · 2012 to 2016
$32.2M
Institutional Clinical and Translational Science Award (UW-Madison)KL2RR025012 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI DREZNER, MARC KENNETH · 2007 to 2011
$11.1M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000427NCRR NIH HHS KL2 RR025012
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveProphylactic antiseizure drugs (PAD) are commonly prescribed for non-traumatic intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) despite limited evidence for this indication. We sought to determine the current prescribing patterns of the use of a PAD for ICH.

methodsA 36-item survey was distributed to physicians who manage ICH patients soliciting details of PAD prescription in their practice.

resultsA total of 199 physicians responded to the survey, all of who manage 50 or more ICH patients per year. The respondents were neurologists (32%), neurosurgeons (11%), and intensivists (57%) in academia (69%) and private practice (31%). Prophylactic antiseizure drugs prescriptions used: never (33%), 1-33% (35%), 34-66% (14%), 67-99% (9%) of the time, or always (9%). Most respondents performed electroencephalographic and serum level monitoring in at least some patients. Levetiracetam was used most often (60%), followed by fosphenytoin (37%), for a usual duration of days (36%), weeks (47%), or months (17%). Prophylactic antiseizure drugs prescription varied by patient characteristics and physician specialty. Perception of physician community consensus regarding PAD use for ICH among respondents ranged from strongly (7%) or weakly (23%) against the practice, to a fairly equal division of opinion (41%), to weakly (27%) or strongly (4%) in favor of the practice.

conclusionsWe found variability of multiple aspects of the current prescribing patterns and opinions regarding the use of a PAD for ICH. This variability is likely secondary to insufficient data. Clinical equipoise exists for this issue, and controlled trials would be both justified and useful.

Indexed as

Drug UtilizationAnticonvulsantsBrainCerebral HemorrhageDrug PrescriptionsElectroencephalographyHumansLevetiracetamPhenytoinPiracetamPractice Patterns, Physicians'SeizuresSurveys and QuestionnairesAnticonvulsantsfosphenytoinLevetiracetamPhenytoinPiracetam

Identifiers

PMID23582711
PMCPMC3720674
OpenAlexW2054298003

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.