Observational studyWorld journal of pediatrics : WJP2018
Oxcarbazepine oral suspension in young pediatric patients with partial seizures and/or generalized tonic-clonic seizures in routine clinical practice in China: a prospective observational study.
Observational study in World journal of pediatrics : WJP, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of levetiracetam vs. oxcarbazepine in the treatment of children with epilepsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2024Pooled it
- Stratified Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Could Potentially Improve the Efficacy and Safety of Oxcarbazepine in Children with Epilepsy: Novel Insights from a Single-Center, Large-Sample, Retrospective Real-World Study.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Effectiveness and Safety of Oxcarbazepine vs. Levetiracetam as Monotherapy for Infantile Focal Epilepsy: A Longitudinal Cohort Study.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 11 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to assess efficacy and safety of oxcarbazepine (OXC) oral suspension in pediatric patients aged 2-5 years with partial seizures (PS) and/or generalized tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS) in real-world clinical practice in China.
methodsThis 26-week, prospective, single-arm, multicenter, observational study recruited pediatric patients aged 2-5 years with PS or GTCS suitable for OXC oral suspension treatment based on physicians' judgments from 11 medical centers in China. Enrolled subjects started OXC oral suspension treatment as monotherapy or in combination with other antiepileptic drugs. Primary efficacy outcome was the percentage of pediatric subjects achieving ≥ 50% seizure frequency reduction at the end of the 26-week treatment. Secondary efficacy-related parameters and safety parameters such as adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs) were also monitored during the 26-week treatment period.
resultsSix hundred and six pediatric patients were enrolled and 531 (87.6%) completed the study. After 26 weeks of treatment, 93.3% subjects achieved ≥ 50% seizure frequency reduction, and 81.8% achieved 100% seizure frequency reduction compared to baseline. Among different seizure types, OXC was effective in all subjects with simple PS and in > 90% of subject with other type of seizure present in the study. AEs were observed in 49 (8.1%) subjects. Only three subjects experienced SAE. Rash (n = 18, 2.97%) was the most common AE. Only 17 subjects discontinued due to AEs.
conclusionThis study, reporting the real-world data, further confirms the efficacy and good safety profile of OXC oral suspension in Chinese pediatric patients aged 2-5 years with PS and/or GTCS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.