Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23917849›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Neurology2013

Outcome predictors for status epilepticus--what really counts.

Raoul Sutter, Peter W Kaplan, Stephan Rüegg

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Neurology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 67 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
67citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

67 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 172 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Imaging of Status Epilepticus.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Observational

7 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Raoul SutterDepartment of Neurology and Intensive Care Unit, University Hospital Basel, Petersgraben 4, 4031 Basel, Switzerland. raoul.sutter@usb.ch
Peter W Kaplan
Stephan Rüegg
Hospital Base · CLJohns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In adult patients with status epilepticus (SE)-a life-threatening state of ongoing or repetitive seizures--the current evidence regarding outcome prediction is based on clinical, biochemical and EEG determinants. These predictors of outcome involve clinical features such as age, history of prior seizures or epilepsy, SE aetiology, level of consciousness, and seizure type at SE onset. The clinical risk-benefit calculation between the danger of undertreated persistent seizure activity and, conversely, the potential damage from unwarranted aggressive treatments remains a constant challenge. Improved knowledge of outcome determinants, as well as increased availability of reliable outcome prediction models early in the course of SE, is paramount for optimization of treatment of patients who develop this disorder. In this Review, we discuss the major prognostic determinants of outcome in SE. Through consideration of studies that provide measures of association between predictors of SE outcome and death, we propose a detailed--but as yet unvalidated--paradigm for assessment of these predictors during the course of SE. Such an algorithm could guide the organization of results from existing trials and provide direction with regard to the parameters that should be monitored in future studies of SE.

Indexed as

FemaleHumansMalePrognosisStatus EpilepticusTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID23917849
OpenAlexW2131983839

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.